Opinion
No. 7753
Decided January 16, 1978
Appeal and Error — Certification of Questions — Questions Considered In absence of showing of any exceptional circumstances which would warrant certification, in advance of appeal de novo to superior court, of question whether evidence was sufficient to support guilty verdict, petition filed in supreme court for writ of certiorari, claiming abuse of discretion of district court, would be dismissed. RSA 491:17, 502-A:17-a (Supp. 1975).
David H. Souter, attorney general (Edward N. Damon, assistant attorney general, orally), for the State.
William P. Shea and Lee Mattson, of Sanbornville (Mr. Mattson orally), for the defendants.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Defendants were convicted in Durham District Court of attempted theft in violation of RSA 637:3. There is no transcript of the testimony. After several procedural events not material to the issue before us, the District Court (Nadeau, J.) denied the defendants' motion to certify to this court, in advance of an appeal de novo to the superior court, the question whether the evidence was sufficient to support the guilty verdict. Defendants thereafter filed this petition for a writ of certiorari in this court claiming an abuse of discretion on the part of the Durham District Court.
Defendants have not shown any exceptional circumstances which would warrant a certification of questions of law to this court under the provisions of RSA 502-A:17-a (Supp. 1975) and RSA 491:17. State v. Varney, 117 N.H. 163, 370 A.2d 289 (1977); State v. Doyle, 117 N.H. 789, 378 A.2d 1379 (1977).
Petition dismissed.
LAMPRON, J., did not sit.