Aug 21, 2014
Aug 14, 2014
Jul 24, 2014
Jul 16, 2014
Man fails to convince state Supreme Court police blocked free speech
CONCORD - A man convicted of disorderly conduct can't use the First Amendment to claim he has a right to interrupt police while they interview another person and offer to videotape the conversation, the New Hampshire Supreme Court ruled last week.
In a unanimous ruling, the court said Samuel Biondolillo went beyond his rights when he came within an arm's length of a Concord police officer, who was interviewing the father of a young child whose mother was about to be arrested.
Police said they wanted to determine whether the father was capable of caring for the child. But Biondolillo asked the father if he was OK, whether he wanted a lawyer and whether he wanted the interaction with police recorded.
"It was not the content of the defendant's speech that caused Office Garcia to arrest him. Rather, it was the fact that he was interfering with the performance of Garcia's duties as a law enforcement officer and subsequently refused Garcia's lawful command aimed a preventing further interference," according to a ruling written by Justice Gary Hicks.
The incident took place outside a McDonald's restaurant on June 28, 2011. During a bench trial, Biondolillo was cleared of a charge of obstructing government administration but found guilty of disorderly conduct.
Biondolillo's lawyer, Manchester attorney Brandon D. Ross, said his client is part of the Free State movement. He said a decision has not been made whether to appeal Biondolillo's conviction to federal court.
Nicholas Cort, an assistant attorney general who argued against the appeal, said the key to the decision was interference in the duties of the police officer. Recently, a federal appeals court in Boston ruled that a bystander has a constitutional right to videotape police in public, but that case did not involve an interference with police.
"That's the big difference," Cort said.
READER COMMENTS: 0
- Police: Activist in chicken suit was warned not to pester Shaheen prior to arrest - 1
- Judge orders prosecutors to disclose more details in Portsmouth bat beating probe - 0
- Former Claremont police dispatcher waives hearing on sexual assault charges - 2
- Some sexual assault charges dismissed against Nashua caretaker - 0
- Dover man indicted in sexual assault of young girl - 0
- Rochester man facing attempted murder charge - 0
- Mother, daughter, man charged in prostitution case in Nashua - 0
- Alleged accomplice of Dover-area burglaries indicted - 0
- Somersworth liquor store robbed - 0
READER COMMENTS: 0
- Officials hire principal for Golden Brook school - 0
- Seniors help students start year on the right foot, with the write stuff - 0
- Derry councilors select semi-finalists for town admin job - 0
- Plaistow begins search for new police chief - 0
- Without an exemption, Goffstown resident must pay high taxes on solar energy panels - 1
- Upcoming selectmen's meeting stirring controversy among Bow's firefighters - 1
- Manchester police to hold ‘Coffee with a Cop’ event - 0
- Manchester police officer finds gun in cyclist’s backpack - 2
- President Obama: Rescue attempt of NH-based journalist James Foley failed - 27
Derry to NH: Take Exit 4A
Editorial: Garcia gains Lambert lies
Poll: Brown makes gains on Sen. Shaheen
- Mass. Supreme Judicial Court has found upskirt photos taken on a subway aren't illegal. Should such voyeurism be a crime?
- Total Votes: 917