NHCaseLaw.com

SELYA, Circuit Judge. The spiraling cost of brand-name prescription drugs is a matter of great concern to government at every level. New Hampshire has attempted to curb this escalating problem by enacting innovative legislation. Certain affected companies have challenged New Hampshire's legislative response, and that challenge raises important constitutional questions that lie at the intersection of free speech and cyberspace. The tale follows.

DUGGAN, J. The defendant, Jay S. Weiner, appeals an order of the Hampton District Court (Frasier, J.) granting the request by the plaintiff, Rita MacPherson, to extend a final protective order for an additional five years. See RSA 633:3-a, III-c (2007). We affirm.

DALIANIS, J. The defendant, Ronald Lamarche, appeals his conviction after a bench trial in Superior Court (Fitzgerald, J.) of one count of being in New Hampshire without permission while on probation in another state. See RSA 651-A:25, IX (2007). We affirm.

The petitioner, Terry M. Bennett, M.D., originally brought this action challenging the manner in which the New Hampshire Board of Medicine ("Board") had been investigating and adjudicating complaints against him. The petitioner now moves for an injunction barring the Board from taking any further action relative to the complaints against him. The Board objects. The Court held a hearing on the motion on May 11, 2006. Considering the parties' arguments and the relevant law, the Court finds and rules as follows.

The defendant, Smoke Signals Pipe & Tobacco Shop, LLC (Smoke Signals), appeals an order of the Superior Court (Mohl, J.) denying its motion for return of property, following its acquittal of four class B misdemeanor charges of sale of drug paraphernalia. We reject Smoke Signals’ argument that the definition of drug paraphernalia in RSA 318-B:1, X-a (Supp. 2006) is unconstitutionally vague, but conclude that, under the circumstances of this case, even though the items seized here come within the categories of items listed in RSA 318-B:1, X-a, the superior court erred in denying Smoke Signals' motion. Accordingly, we reverse.

Defendant is charged with one count of second degree assault with a deadly weapon contrary to RSA 631:2(b) and four counts of reckless conduct with a deadly weapon contrary to RSA 631:3, II. Defendant moves to dismiss each of these charges for failing to allege criminal acts under New Hampshire's Criminal Code. Alternatively, defendant argues that the statutes under which he is charged are unconstitutionally vague. The State objects. After hearing and after significant consideration of the parties' arguments with the applicable law, defendant's Motion to Dismiss is DENIED.

On January 15, 2004, the defendant was found guilty of five (5) counts of aggravated felonious sexual assault (“AFSA”) pursuant to RSA 632-A:2. (Supp. 2003). Each charge alleges that the defendant touched the victim’s penis on five separate occasions in 2001. In a pretrial ruling, the Court (Abramson, J.) determined that the New Hampshire Supreme Court opinion in State v. Melvin, 150 N.H. 134 (2003), applies in this case and requires the Court to impose a mandatory sentence of life in prison without parole. The defendant again requests that the Court not apply the mandatory life sentence provision in RSA 632-A:10-a, III in this case. The State objects arguing the defendant meets the criteria of RSA 632-A:10-a, III, because he has been previously convicted of two or more AFSA offenses.