State v. Brooks

Summary

The New Hampshire Supreme Court affirmed Jesse Brooks's conviction for conspiracy to commit murder. The court held that any error in admitting prior recorded statements as recorded recollections was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, upheld the trial court's finding that a witness was competent to testify, and addressed the defendant's speedy-trial claim under the Barker v. Wingo framework.

Holdings

1. Even assuming without deciding that the trial court erred by admitting Chamberlain's 2007 and 2008 statements as recorded recollections, any error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt because the statements were cumulative and inconsequential in light of the overwhelming alternative evidence of Brooks's participation in the conspiracy.
2. The trial court did not unsustainably exercise its discretion in finding Chamberlain competent to testify because the record supported his ability to observe, remember, narrate, and understand the duty to tell the truth.
3. Brooks was not denied his right to a speedy trial under either the New Hampshire or Federal Constitution.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court reversibly erred by admitting Dennis Chamberlain's 2007 and 2008 prior recorded statements under New Hampshire Rule of Evidence 803(5).
2. Whether the trial court unsustainably exercised its discretion by finding Chamberlain competent to testify despite memory problems following brain surgery.
3. Whether the thirty-two-month delay between Brooks's arraignment and trial violated his speedy-trial rights under the New Hampshire and Federal Constitutions.

Disposition

affirmed