Home Confinement (2)

State v. Chrisicos, 2008-135 (N.H. S.Ct., Nov. 7, 2008)

HICKS, J. The defendant, Michelle Chrisicos, appeals an order of the Superior Court (Groff, J.) sentencing her to twelve months in the House of Corrections, stand committed. The State cross-appeals, challenging the trial court’s conclusion that the home confinement provisions of RSA 262:23 (2004) (amended 2006) violate the Equal Protection Clause of the New Hampshire Constitution. See N.H. CONST. pt. I, arts. 1, 2. We reverse the ruling that RSA 262:23 is unconstitutional and affirm the sentence.

State v. Guillermo and Otero, 04-S-2353, 05-S-0166 (Hillsborough, North, Mar. 1, 2006)

The defendants, Alex Guillermo (No. 05-S-2353) and Daniel Otero (No. 05-S-0166), each stand indicted of one felony count of operating a motor vehicle after having been declared an habitual offender. See RSA 262:23 (2004). The defendants each filed a notice of intent to plead guilty, but have each also requested that the Court declare its authority as to whether it may order home confinement as a part of the sentence. The State here objects to any sentence involving home confinement because Hillsborough County and the Hillsborough County Department of Corrections (“HOC”) have not established a home confinement program under RSA 262:23 and RSA 651:19 (Supp. 2005).
Syndicate content