{"id":6486,"date":"2012-03-08T07:34:25","date_gmt":"2011-12-31T00:21:43","guid":{"rendered":""},"modified":"-0001-11-30T00:00:00","modified_gmt":"2011-12-30T21:29:31","slug":"en-US","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=6486","title":{"rendered":"NH discusses without deciding conflict of laws question"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>NH faces conflict of laws question in application of exclusionary rule, which it briefly discusses, but decides it doesn\u2019t have to decide. <a href=\"http:\/\/www.courts.state.nh.us\/supreme\/opinions\/2011\/2011144ruggiero.pdf\">State v. Ruggiero<\/a>, 163 N.H. 129, 35 A.3d 616 (2011):<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>The question presented is whether telephonic evidence that is legally obtained in a sister state by a citizen thereof is admissible in a New Hampshire court proceeding where such evidence would not be admissible if it had been obtained in New Hampshire. This question is one of first impression in New Hampshire, which we review de novo. &#8230;<\/p>\n<p>Courts in other jurisdictions that have considered the issue have generally employed two approaches \u2014 the exclusionary rule approach and the conflicts-of-law approach. See <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=12816705799051072056&amp;q=712+N.W.2d+530&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,10\">State v. Schmidt<\/a>, 712 N.W.2d 530, 535 (Minn. 2006) (discussing the conflicts-of-law approaches used by other states in deciding evidentiary issues); <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=15726994015720397723&amp;q=85+N.Y.2d+151&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,10\">People v. Capolongo<\/a>, 85 N.Y.2d 151, 647 N.E.2d 1286, 1293, 623 N.Y.S.2d 778 (N.Y. 1995) (discussing the split in jurisdictions between the exclusionary rule approach and the conflicts-of-law approach); see also 1 W. R. LaFave, Search and Seizure, A Treatise on the Fourth Amendment \u00a7 1.5(c), at 183-86 (4th ed. 2004). Jurisdictions following the exclusionary rule approach \u201cadhere to the Federal view that the overriding purpose of the exclusionary rule is to deter unlawful governmental conduct, and that one State\u2019s laws have no deterrent effect on conduct of governmental agents of another jurisdiction.\u201d <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=15726994015720397723&amp;q=85+N.Y.2d+151&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,10\">Capolongo<\/a>, 647 N.E.2d at 1293. Alternatively, jurisdictions that conduct a conflicts-of-law analysis typically weigh the interests of the forum state against those of the sister state and assess which state has the greater interest in the process by which the evidence was obtained. See <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.google.com\/scholar_case?case=2673614864733427499&amp;q=372+N.W.2d+731&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2,10\">State v. Lucas<\/a>, 372 N.W.2d 731, 736-37 (Minn. 1985).<\/p><\/blockquote>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>b2evALnk.b2WPAutP <a class=\"more-link\" href=\"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/?p=6486\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"pingsdone","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-6486","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6486","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=6486"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/6486\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=6486"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=6486"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/fourthamendment.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=6486"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}