## Facts

- William S. Strescino was charged by two indictments with second-degree manslaughter under RSA 585:9, punishable under RSA 585:11.
- The charges alleged a killing “by the act, procurement, or culpable negligence of another,” tracking the statutory language.
- The alleged incident involved an automobile left on a highway without lights, followed by a collision resulting in a death.
- Before trial, Strescino challenged the indictments as legally insufficient, arguing they alleged only ordinary (civil) negligence rather than “culpable negligence.”

## Issues

1. What level of fault does “culpable negligence” require under RSA 585:9 (second-degree manslaughter)?
2. Whether indictments that track the statutory term “culpable negligence” are sufficient as a matter of law when the defendant claims they allege only simple negligence.

## Decision

- The court defined “culpable negligence” under RSA 585:9 as criminal negligence involving a substantial and unjustifiable risk and a gross deviation from the standard of care a reasonable person would observe in the actor’s situation.
- The court held that “culpable negligence” requires more than negligence sufficient for civil liability.
- Applying that definition, the court ruled the indictments were sufficient as a matter of law and allowed the prosecution to proceed.
- Whether the defendant’s conduct actually met the “culpable negligence” standard was left for the trier of fact at trial.

## Legal Principles

- For second-degree manslaughter, “culpable negligence” is a heightened form of negligence, exceeding ordinary civil negligence.
- A workable standard for “culpable negligence” is the Model Penal Code concept of negligent conduct: failure to perceive a substantial and unjustifiable risk, where that failure constitutes a gross deviation from reasonable care under the circumstances.
- An indictment that charges the statutory offense using the statutory term “culpable negligence,” and alleges a resulting death, is not facially insufficient merely because the defendant disputes the degree of negligence; the evidentiary sufficiency is for trial.

## Conclusion

The court clarified that “culpable negligence” for second-degree manslaughter requires a gross deviation from reasonable care involving a substantial and unjustifiable risk, and it held that indictments tracking the statutory language were legally sufficient, leaving the ultimate culpability determination for trial.


State v. Strescino, 106 N.H. 554 (1965)