New Hampshire v. Hernandez
Annotate this CaseDefendant Ivonne Hernandez was convicted by a jury for second degree murder, second degree assault and reckless conduct. On appeal, Defendant argued that the trial court erred in denying her motion to suppress statements she made to the police.On the evening of May 1, 2008, a drunken dispute between Defendant and four others ended when Defendant "turned her car around and drove directly towards the group." At trial, one witness testified that Defendant then revved her engine and accelerated towards the group. One attempted to jump out of the way, but the car hit her knee, causing a minor injury. The car also struck and severely injured another. Defendant argued at trial that the statement she gave to police recounting her version of events was involuntary and should have been suppressed. In this case, the Supreme Court found that the evidence supported the conclusion that Defendant's statements were the product of a free and unconstrained choice. "Based upon this evidence, [the court could not] say that the trial court's determination was against the manifest weight of the evidence." Accordingly, the Court affirmed the trial court's finding that Defendant’s statements were voluntary.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.