• Home
  • About AIA
    • About AIA
    • AIA’s Executive Team
    • Agent Testimonials
  • News
    • Bail Bond Blog
    • Recent Bail Articles
  • Bail Bond Resources
    • Become an AIA Bail Bond Agent Old
    • Bail Bond FAQs
    • Bail Research Library
    • State by State Bail Directory
    • Upcoming State Association Meetings and Events
  • Other Bonds
  • Contact

New Hampshire Case Laws

You are here: Home / New Hampshire Bail Resources / New Hampshire Case Laws

New Hampshire Case Laws

Click on the below to read New Hampshire Case Laws for the following years:
2012

New Hampshire Case Law 2012

In State v. McGurk, 2012 WL 1649752 (N.H. May 11, 2012) the defendant failed to appear because he was incarcerated in Vermont.  The Court thought that appearance of the defendant was not prevented “by the act of God, or the government of the United States or of this state or by sentence of law” and therefore the surety had not shown a statutory ground for relief from its obligation.  If the defendant had been arrested and held by the federal government or by a New Hampshire jurisdiction, the surety would have been entitled to relief, but arrest by another state did not qualify.  The Court affirmed judgment forfeiting the bonds.

In Fischer v. Superintendent, Strafford County House of Corrections, 2012 WL 1370828 (N.H. April 20, 2012) the trial court set bail at $50,000 to convert to personal recognizance if Stafford County Community Corrections (SCCC) found that the defendant’s proposed living arrangements were acceptable.  The defendant proposed several living arrangements that were not acceptable to SCCC, and the bond therefore did not “convert” to personal recognizance.  The defendant argued that the trial court unconstitutionally delegated its authority to set bail to SCCC in violation of the principle of separation of powers.  The Court held that there was no violation because the trial court set the bail conditions and SCCC only made recommendations.  The Court stated, “We see little functional difference between SCCC determining that it could not adequately supervise the petitioner in the residential placements he proposed and SCCC recommending against pretrial release.  That the court decided the alternative consequences of SCCC’s decision prior to SCCC making it does not make the ultimate decision any less the court’s.”

Search

Recent Blog Posts

The Misleading Pretrial Numbers Game
The Misleading Pretrial Numbers Game
June 02,2026 - 4:45 am

© Copyright 2005-2026 AIA Surety All Rights Reserved | 800.935.2245

  • About AIA
  • Bail Resources
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy and Security
  • Accessibility
wpDiscuz
0
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x
| Reply
Skip to content
Open toolbar

Accessibility

  • Increase Text
  • Decrease Text
  • Grayscale
  • High Contrast
  • Negative Contrast
  • Light Background
  • Links Underline
  • Readable Font
  • Reset
  • Help