In the case of the State of New Hampshire v. Sondra Murray, Ms. Murray was charged with disorderly conduct, resisting arrest, and possession of marijuana. She was convicted of the disorderly conduct which violated N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 644:2, and possession of marijuana, which violated N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 318-B:2. The charges were misdemeanors, but were reduced down to violations as required under N.H. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 625:9. The defendant appealed the guilty verdict to the Supreme Court of New Hampshire.
The defendant was a passenger in a car when the driver was arrested for driving on a revoked license. She yelled unknown comments out the window that did not interfere with the arrest of the driver. There were no other people who were in the area …show more content…
They reviewed the statute as well as the history of it and other cases that applied the law. They referred to the common law of the similar case of People v. O 'Keefe, 218 Mich. 1, 187 N.W. 282 (1922) for comparison. That court ruled there was no disturbance of the peace for the reason that only the police officer witnessed the behavior and there was no one else around to be disturbed. Upon review of the Model Penal Code, it also states that there must be an inconvenience to the public for disorderly conduct to apply. The court stated in that there was no public inconvenience, and with the lack of a witness to show someone other than the police officer was being disturbed, there was no breach of the peace, public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm. Therefore, the requirements needed to violate the statute do not exist. The Supreme Court of New Hampshire overturned Ms. Murray’s conviction. The court also stated that as a result of the conviction being overturned there is no need to address the defendant’s issue with the constitution or the issue to amend her appeal for reasonable
The defendant was a passenger in a car when the driver was arrested for driving on a revoked license. She yelled unknown comments out the window that did not interfere with the arrest of the driver. There were no other people who were in the area …show more content…
They reviewed the statute as well as the history of it and other cases that applied the law. They referred to the common law of the similar case of People v. O 'Keefe, 218 Mich. 1, 187 N.W. 282 (1922) for comparison. That court ruled there was no disturbance of the peace for the reason that only the police officer witnessed the behavior and there was no one else around to be disturbed. Upon review of the Model Penal Code, it also states that there must be an inconvenience to the public for disorderly conduct to apply. The court stated in that there was no public inconvenience, and with the lack of a witness to show someone other than the police officer was being disturbed, there was no breach of the peace, public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm. Therefore, the requirements needed to violate the statute do not exist. The Supreme Court of New Hampshire overturned Ms. Murray’s conviction. The court also stated that as a result of the conviction being overturned there is no need to address the defendant’s issue with the constitution or the issue to amend her appeal for reasonable