New Hampshire
How Berghuis v. Thompkins applies in New Hampshire: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Criminal Procedure.
New Hampshire follows the principle established in Berghuis v. Thompkins, asserting that a suspect must unambiguously invoke their right to silence. The state requires clear communication of this right to ensure that law enforcement can respect it.
In New Hampshire, a suspect must clearly articulate their desire to invoke their right to remain silent; mere silence during questioning is insufficient to establish this invocation.
The court held that a defendant must unequivocally express their wish to remain silent for the interrogation to be deemed non-compliant with their rights.
The court ruled that ambiguous statements made by a suspect did not adequately invoke the right to silence established in Berghuis v. Thompkins.
The court emphasized that the burden remains on the suspect to clearly articulate their desire to invoke their rights during custodial interrogation.
New Hampshire's approach is consistent with the federal standard set forth in Berghuis v. Thompkins, where it was determined that ambiguous or unclear assertions of the right to silence do not warrant cessation of interrogation. Both emphasize the necessity for unequivocal invocation by the suspect.
Understanding the concept of unambiguous invocation of the right to silence is crucial for the New Hampshire bar exam, particularly in the context of criminal procedure and defendants' rights.