State v. Gaylor, 158 N.H. 230

Summary

The Supreme Court of New Hampshire held that Gregory Gaylor was not entitled to reinstate an appeal dismissed under the fugitive disentitlement rule after he absconded during trial and remained a fugitive during the appellate period. The court also declined to accept his later appeal as untimely and discretionary, concluding that his sentence amendment did not revive appellate rights.

Holdings

1. A defendant who absents himself from the jurisdiction during the appellate period forfeits the right to appellate review, and Gaylor's appeal would not be reinstated because no extraordinary equities relating to the merits justified departing from that rule.
2. The appeal was not timely because the relevant sentence amendment occurred in May 2006, and any appellate rights arising from that order expired more than a year before Gaylor filed the appeal.
3. The appeal concerning the 2006 sentence amendment was discretionary rather than mandatory, and the Supreme Court declined to accept it.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Gaylor's previously dismissed appeal should be reinstated after he returned to custody and asserted insufficient-evidence and actual-innocence claims.
2. Whether the 2007 appeal was timely based on a purported 2007 amendment or notice concerning his sentences.
3. Whether the appeal concerning the 2006 sentence amendment was mandatory or discretionary and whether the Supreme Court should accept it.

Disposition

other