Today, after more than a year of time and work, the New Hampshire Supreme Court ruled on my appeal for my felony wiretapping convictions, stating:
The evidence of the defendant’s willful mental state at the time he recorded the conversations was far from overwhelming. Thus, there is the very real prospect that the jury would have returned different verdicts had it been properly instructed. Cf. United States v. Paul, 37 F.3d 496, 500 (9th Cir. 1994) (finding the plain error test satisfied where the district court improperly instructed the jury on the different mental state requirements of voluntary and involuntary manslaughter, for in doing so the district court “created a substantial risk that [the defendant] was convicted of voluntary manslaughter, even though the jury may have believed the killing was neither intentional nor extremely reckless”). To allow the convictions to stand under these circumstances “would seriously affect the fairness and integrity of judicial proceedings.” Guay, 162 N.H. at 384. Accordingly, we reverse the convictions and remand for a new trial.
I’d like to congratulate Brandon Ross, a Concord (NH) attorney, on this ruling. It’s more than just a personal relief to me, it’s the fruit of Brandon’s labor and his desire to see justice served. Brandon came to visit me days after my conviction in Valley Street Jail, offering to conduct my appeal pro bono. All I had to do was pay for the trial transcripts, which I was lucky enough to raise the funds for via donations – a very special thanks to all the donors, much love. I haven’t had to spend one ounce of my time on this matter, so the victory is all his.
