PER CURIAM.
The defendant was charged with witness-tampering under RSA 641:5 and was found guilty. The issue in this case is whether the State was required to prove that, in talking with the witness, the defendant used the precise words alleged in the indictment. We hold that the State was not so required.
The indictment charged that the defendant, believing his trial for assault (RSA 631:2-a (Supp. 1979)) and criminal threatening (RSA 631:4) was pending before...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.
