The New Hampshire Supreme Court has reversed the assault convictions of Dominic Cherbonneau following a jury trial. The court ruled that there was insufficient evidence to prove that Cherbonneau did not act in self-defense during a violent altercation in November 2022. This decision impacts not only Cherbonneau but also sets a precedent for how self-defense claims are evaluated in similar cases.

The case, State v. Cherbonneau (Docket No. 2024-0497), arose from an incident at a restaurant in Manchester, where Cherbonneau and his friends were involved in a confrontation that escalated into gunfire. The court's ruling emphasizes the importance of self-defense rights in New Hampshire law and clarifies the burden of proof required to disprove such claims.

Background

The dispute began when Cherbonneau was charged with attempted first-degree assault and riot after a confrontation at a Manchester restaurant. The incident involved a group of individuals, including Cherbonneau, who were drinking and playing pool. Tensions escalated when another group, including alleged victims C.M. and C.G., entered the establishment, leading to a physical altercation.

After the initial confrontation inside the restaurant, the altercation continued outside in a nearby parking lot, where gunfire erupted. Cherbonneau was accused of firing a weapon during this exchange, which resulted in injuries to C.G. The jury found him guilty on one count of attempted first-degree assault and two counts of riot, but he maintained that he acted in self-defense. Following the trial, Cherbonneau filed a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV), arguing that the evidence did not support the convictions.

The Ruling

The Supreme Court of New Hampshire ruled in favor of Cherbonneau, agreeing that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did not act in self-defense. The court stated, "We conclude there was insufficient evidence that the defendant had a duty to retreat from the encounter... and the trial court erred in denying his motion for JNOV on this basis." The ruling was issued on November 4, 2026, and was authored by Justice Countway, with Justices Gould and Temple concurring.

The court highlighted that the State failed to disprove that Cherbonneau had a reasonable belief that he was in imminent danger during the altercation. The justices noted that the evidence did not sufficiently support the conclusion that Cherbonneau was the initial aggressor or that he had a duty to retreat from the situation.

Impact

This ruling has significant implications for self-defense cases in New Hampshire. It reinforces the principle that the burden of proof lies with the State to disprove a defendant's claim of self-defense. The court's decision clarifies that if a defendant can demonstrate a reasonable belief that they were acting in self-defense, the State must provide compelling evidence to counter that claim.

Additionally, this case sets a precedent for future self-defense claims, potentially influencing how similar cases are prosecuted in the state. Defendants may find it easier to argue self-defense if they can show a reasonable belief of imminent danger, as the court emphasized the importance of the defendant's perspective during such encounters.

What's Next

Following the Supreme Court's decision, Cherbonneau's convictions have been overturned. While the State could potentially seek further legal recourse, such as a rehearing or reconsideration, the court's ruling stands as a significant victory for Cherbonneau. There are no related cases pending that could directly impact this ruling.