New Hampshire
How Davis v. United States applies in New Hampshire: state-specific rules, key cases, and bar exam notes for Criminal Procedure.
New Hampshire generally follows the precedent set in Davis v. United States in determining the legality of searches and the good faith exception. Additionally, the New Hampshire Supreme Court emphasizes the need for warrant requirements in line with state constitutional protections against unreasonable searches.
In New Hampshire, the law follows the principle that evidence obtained from a search that violates the Fourth Amendment can be excluded unless it falls under the good faith exception established in Davis.
The court found that a warrantless search was unconstitutional, reinforcing the requirements for probable cause and the good faith exception.
This case clarified the application of the good faith exception, allowing evidence to be used when officers relied on a faulty warrant in good faith.
The court ruled that the good faith exception does not apply when law enforcement acts in willful disregard of established procedures.
New Hampshire mirrors the federal approach in recognizing the good faith exception laid out in Davis v. United States, yet the state also emphasizes its own constitutional protections which can lead to stricter requirements than federal law under certain circumstances.
Candidates should be familiar with the application of the good faith exception and how New Hampshire's constitutional protections can influence the interpretation of search and seizure laws, as these principles may be tested.