State v. Souksamrane
164 N.H. 425
| N.H. | 2012Background
- Defendant Thavone Souksamrane was convicted of criminal threatening and being a felon in possession of a dangerous weapon after a jury trial in superior court.
- Trial evidence showed the victim, living in the same building, was approached by the defendant, who produced a gun and threatened him to stay away from his family, leading to a struggle.
- Police later recovered a gun matching the victim’s description after a warrant was obtained and a key opened a locked case in which the gun was housed.
- The defendant testified under an alias, offered an alternative version of events involving his wife and the victim, and claimed the police and wife lied.
- During cross-examination, the prosecutor repeatedly asked whether officers and the wife lied, which the State concedes was improper and the trial court failed to sustain objections.
- The court assessed whether the misconduct required reversal, concluding the error was harmless given overwhelming and corroborated evidence of guilt.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prosecutor’s cross-examination about lying | State contends questioning was proper to test credibility. | Souksamrane objected; such questions are improper per Lopez. | Improper but harmless error |
| Harmlessness of improper cross-examination of defendant's credibility | Error not harmless if prejudicial to the verdict. | Error impacted the jury’s view of credibility. | Harmless beyond a reasonable doubt due to overwhelming evidence |
| Plain error review for unobjected questions about officers’ testimony | Plain error applies to unobjected cross-examination. | Cannot prevail without showing prejudice. | No substantial prejudice; affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Lopez, 156 N.H. 416 (2007) (broad prohibition on testifying that other witnesses lied)
- State v. Graves, 668 N.W.2d 860 (Iowa 2003) (prosecutorial cross-examination to force defendant to imply others lied is improper)
- People v. Montgomery, 481 N.Y.S.2d 532 (App. Div. 1984) (condemns prosecutorial use of lying questions)
- State v. Glidden, 122 N.H. 41 (1982) (allows credibility-focused cross-examination that does not compel comment on veracity)
- State v. Pandelena, 161 N.H. 326 (2010) (plain error framework for appellate review of trial errors)