Saviano v. Director, N.H. Div. of Motor

11 Citing cases

  1. Proulx v. Director, New Hampshire Division of Motor Vehicles

    910 A.2d 1208 (N.H. 2006)   Cited 1 times

    On appeal, the plaintiff argues that Barnett inadequately advised him of the consequences of refusing the requested test because Barnett told him that his license "could" be suspended if he refused to submit to it.In an appeal to the superior court from an ALS decision, the plaintiff has the burden to show that the order was clearly unreasonable or unlawful, and all findings of fact on questions properly before the hearings officer are deemed to be prima facie lawful and reasonable. RSA 263:75, II (2004); see also Saviano v. Director, N.H. Div. of Motor Vehicles, 151 N.H. 315, 318, 855 A.2d 1278 (2004). The superior court may not set aside or vacate the decision appealed from "unless the court is satisfied, by a clear preponderance of the evidence before it, that such order is unjust or unreasonable."

  2. In re Appeal of Mullen

    169 N.H. 392 (N.H. 2016)   Cited 5 times

    At its most basic level, the requirement to afford due process forbids the government from denying or thwarting claims of statutory entitlement by a procedure that is fundamentally unfair. Appeal of Eno, 126 N.H. 650, 653, 495 A.2d 1277 (1985) ; see Saviano v. Director, N.H. Div. of Motor Vehicles, 151 N.H. 315, 320, 855 A.2d 1278 (2004) ("The ultimate standard for judging a due process claim is the notion of fundamental fairness."). "Fundamental fairness requires that government conduct conform to the community's sense of justice, decency and fair play."

  3. State v. Veale

    158 N.H. 632 (N.H. 2009)   Cited 23 times
    Holding that reputation alone is a sufficient interest to require state due process protection and rejecting the federal “stigma-plus” approach

    “The ultimate standard for judging a due process claim is the notion of fundamental fairness.” Saviano v. Director, N.H. Div. of Motor Vehicles, 151 N.H. 315, 320, 855 A.2d 1278 (2004). “Fundamental fairness requires that government conduct conform to the community's sense of justice, decency and fair play.”

  4. State v. Horner

    153 N.H. 306 (N.H. 2006)   Cited 8 times

    Id. We review a trial court's interpretation of a statute de novo. Saviano v. Director, N.H. Div. of Motor Vehicles, 151 N.H. 315, 318-19 (2004). The defendant first argues that the trial court conditionally suspended his third sentence at the time of sentencing, and thus was required to hear his subsequent motion to suspend that sentence irrespective of the time limitations provided in RSA 651:20, I(a). The defendant relies in part upon the language in RSA 651:20, I, that authorizes the trial court to suspend a sentence "at the time of imposition of the sentence."

  5. Gantert v. City of Rochester

    168 N.H. 640 (N.H. 2016)   Cited 11 times
    Explaining that officers have a liberty interest under the New Hampshire constitution in their professional reputations implicated by inclusion on the EES

    "The ultimate standard for judging a due process claim is the notion of fundamental fairness." Saviano v. Director, N.H. Div. of Motor Vehicles, 151 N.H. 315, 320, 855 A.2d 1278 (2004). "Fundamental fairness requires that government conduct conform to the community's sense of justice, decency and fair play."

  6. State v. Ducharme

    167 N.H. 606 (N.H. 2015)   Cited 4 times
    Holding that to prove that defendant was "under the influence of intoxicating liquor," State needed to prove beyond reasonable doubt only that defendant was impaired to any degree

    Nonetheless, the defendant argues that he was never actually arrested for DUI and, therefore, the implied consent statute did not apply. Relying upon our interpretation of the implied consent statute in Saviano v. Director, New Hampshire Division of Motor Vehicles, 151 N.H. 315, 855 A.2d 1278 (2004), the defendant contends that, in order for the State to invoke the implied consent statute, a driver must "be arrested for an offense arising out of acts alleged to have been committed while the person was driving or in actual physical control of a motor vehicle while under the influence." The defendant argues that the trial court erroneously ruled that, by reading the first line of the ALS form, the officer arrested him for DUI.

  7. Doe v. State

    167 N.H. 382 (N.H. 2015)   Cited 30 times
    Holding that the punitive-effect "inquiry cannot be answered by looking at the effect of any single provision in the abstract"; rather, a court "must consider the effect of all the provisions and their cumulative impact upon the defendant's rights"

    "The ultimate standard for judging a due process claim is the notion of fundamental fairness." Saviano v. Director, N.H. Div. of Motor Vehicles, 151 N.H. 315, 320, 855 A.2d 1278 (2004). "Fundamental fairness requires that government conduct conform to the community's sense of justice, decency and fair play."

  8. Acquisitions v. Hobert

    155 N.H. 381 (N.H. 2007)   Cited 52 times
    Concluding the employee's severance benefits were not wages under NH RSA 275, and, therefore, the employer did not violate NH RSA 275 in refusing to pay them

    Interpretation of a statute is a question of law, which we review de novo. Appeal of Tennis, 149 N.H. 91, 93 (2003). Also, while we defer to the trial court's factual findings, provided there is evidence in the record to support them, we review its application of the law to the facts de novo. Saviano v. Director, N.H. Div. of Motor Vehicles, 151 N.H. 315, 318 (2004). RSA 275:44, I, requires that "Whenever an employer discharges an employee, the employer shall pay the employee's wages in full within 72 hours.

  9. Hudson v. Director

    921 A.2d 939 (N.H. 2007)   Cited 1 times

    Specifically, he argues that the blood test results should have been excluded because there was no indication of the type of non-alcoholic cleanser used and because the transmittal slip: (1) states the wrong date and time the blood was drawn; (2) does not provide the name and title of the person withdrawing the blood; and (3) does not list the type of non-alcoholic cleanser used to prepare the skin.In an appeal to the superior court from an ALS hearing, the plaintiff bears the burden to show that the order upholding the suspension was clearly unreasonable or unlawful, and all findings of fact on questions properly before the hearings officer are deemed to be prima facie lawful and reasonable. RSA 263:75 (2004); Saviano v. Director, N.H. Div. of Motor Vehicles, 151 N.H. 315, 318, 855 A.2d 1278 (2004). Resolution of this appeal requires statutory interpretation, which is a question of law that we review de novo. Debonis v. Warden, N.H. State Prison, 153 N.H. 603, 605, 903 A.2d 993 (2006).

  10. State v. Barkus

    152 N.H. 701 (N.H. 2005)   Cited 9 times
    Holding that defendant's election to proceed with breath test after being informed of her right to refuse constituted intervening act between primary illegality and subsequent search

    As to the inadmissible statements, New Hampshire's "implied consent" law, RSA 265:84, states that "[a]ny person who drives a vehicle upon the ways of this state shall be deemed to have given consent to physical tests and examinations for the purpose of determining whether such person is under the influence of intoxicating liquor." RSA 265:84; see also Saviano v. Director, N.H. Div. of Motor Vehicles, 151 N.H. 315, 319 (2004). We have, accordingly, held that the act of submitting to a breath test "is voluntary because the very act of driving on New Hampshire's public roads implies consent to take the test."