Connection lost
Server error
STATE v. BARNABY Case Brief
Why Top Law Students (And Those Aspiring to Be) Use LSD+ Briefs
Let's be real, law school is a marathon. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full case system is designed by Harvard Law School and MIT grads to match your pace: Quick summaries when you're slammed, detailed analysis when you need to go deep. Only LSD+ offers this kind of flexibility to genuinely fit your study flow.
Adaptive Case Views
Toggle between Flash, Standard, and Expanded. Get what you need, when you need it.
Exam-Ready IRAC Format
We deliver the precise structure professors look for in exam answers.
Complex Cases, Clarified
We break down dense legal reasoning into something digestible, helping you grasp core concepts.
Case Brief Summary & Legal Analysis
tl;dr: The State sought to depose Canadian witnesses for a murder trial. The court clarified the standard for taking such depositions under state law, holding that a witness’s foreign residency is a key factor in determining if they are “unlikely to be available” for trial, and remanded.
Legal Significance: This case clarifies the standard under New Hampshire law for obtaining pre-trial depositions of out-of-jurisdiction witnesses in criminal cases, interpreting the meaning of “unlikely to be available for trial” under RSA 517:13, II(a) and establishing that foreign residency is a significant, but not dispositive, factor.
STATE v. BARNABY Law School Study Guide
Use this case brief structure for your own legal analysis. Focus on the IRAC methodology to excel in law school exams and cold calls.
Case Facts & Court Holding
Key Facts & Case Background
The State re-indicted defendants Anthony Barnaby and David Caplin for two murders that occurred in 1988, following three prior mistrials for Barnaby. In preparation for the new trials, the State moved to take video depositions of eleven material witnesses who were residents of Canada. The State argued the depositions were necessary under RSA 517:13 to preserve testimony because the witnesses were outside the court’s subpoena power. The defendants objected. The trial court granted depositions for only a few witnesses, ruling that a witness’s foreign residency and immunity from subpoena, standing alone, was insufficient to demonstrate the “necessity” required by the statute. The court held that the State must provide more specific facts showing it is “unlikely” the witness will voluntarily appear for trial. The State appealed, arguing the trial court applied an incorrect and overly stringent interpretation of the statutory standard for obtaining pre-trial depositions.
Court Holding & Legal Precedent
Issue: What is the proper standard under New Hampshire RSA 517:13, II(a) for determining whether a pre-trial deposition is necessary to preserve the testimony of a witness who is “unlikely to be available for trial” due to being absent from the jurisdiction?
Vacated and remanded. The trial court applied an incorrect legal standard by Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat
IRAC Legal Analysis
Complete IRAC Analysis for Higher Grades
IRAC (Issue, Rule, Analysis, Conclusion) is the exact format professors want to see in your exam answers. Our exclusive Flash-to-Full briefs combine holding, analysis, and rule statements formatted to match what A+ students produce in exams. These structured briefs help reinforce the essential legal reasoning patterns expected in law school.
Legal Issue
What is the proper standard under New Hampshire RSA 517:13, II(a) for determining whether a pre-trial deposition is necessary to preserve the testimony of a witness who is “unlikely to be available for trial” due to being absent from the jurisdiction?
Conclusion
This case provides a key precedent in New Hampshire criminal procedure by Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud e
Legal Rule
Under RSA 517:13, II(a), a party seeking a deposition must show by Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia
Legal Analysis
The Supreme Court of New Hampshire engaged in de novo statutory interpretation Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt moll
Flash-to-Full Case Opinions
Flash Summary
- A witness’s foreign residency and immunity from subpoena is not, by