Case Name: The State of New Hampshire v. Victor W. Dysart
Court: New Hampshire Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New Hampshire
Decision Date: 1978-10-30
Citations: 118 N.H. 743
Docket Number: No. 78-191
Parties: The State of New Hampshire v. Victor W. Dysart
Judges: 
Reporter: New Hampshire Reports
Volume: 118
Pages: 743–743

Head Matter:
Hillsborough
No. 78-191
The State of New Hampshire v. Victor W. Dysart
October 30, 1978
Thomas D. Rath, attorney general, and Anne E. Cagwin, assistant attorney general {Deborah J. Cooper orally), for the State.
Richard G. Smith, of Jaffrey, filed no brief.

Opinion:
Memorandum
Defendant was found to be a habitual motor vehicle offender following a hearing before the Hillsborough County Superior Court. The trial court ordered defendant not to operate a motor vehicle for six months from the date of its order. This order was later amended to provide for a twelve-month revocation. The State seasonably excepted to the court's order and the matter was transferred here by Loughlin, C.J.
RSA 262-B:5 IV provides that following a finding that a person is a habitual offender the court shall direct the person not to operate a motor vehicle. The period of revocation is governed by RSA 262-B:6 which requires a mandatory lapse of at least four years from the effective date of the order before a person may petition for restoration of his privilege to operate. RSA 262-B:8. Restoration of this privilege is an administrative function required by statute and not one involving judicial discretion, such as suspension of a fine or other sentence. See State v. Greenwood, 115 N.H. 117, 119, 335 A.2d 644, 646 (1975).
Exception sustained; order vacated, remanded.