New Hampshire Supreme Court Stayed Oral Arguments
The court halted proceedings in the case of State vs. Twombly following a challenge to the judicial panel.
Updated on Sept. 21, 2026 in Criminal Justice
Live Poll
Do you trust that judicial panels in your area are composed with sufficient transparency and fairness?
The New Hampshire Supreme Court granted a stay of oral arguments on Monday in the case of State vs. Twombly. The move followed a motion by attorney Mark Sisti, who challenged the composition of the judicial panel currently tasked with hearing the appeal.
Why it matters
The defense requested a fully qualified panel of five justices to ensure due process, citing ongoing concerns regarding the status of justices under investigation. The motion seeks clarity on the court's leadership and ethics after a Judicial Conduct Committee probe began in 2025.
The court has granted the state 14 days to respond to the motion challenging the panel. The appeal requires a full panel of five justices, but current recusals involve Justice Melissa Countway and Justice Bryan Gould.
The players
Mark Sisti
He is the defense attorney who filed the motion to challenge the composition of the judicial panel.
Gordon MacDonald
He is the former Chief Justice who resigned after admitting to three violations of the judicial conduct code.
Tyler Twombly
He is the defendant facing charges of assault, burglary, and felony possession of a weapon.
Melissa Countway
She is a Justice on the New Hampshire Supreme Court who is recused from the current case.
Bryan Gould
He is a Justice on the New Hampshire Supreme Court who is recused from the current case.
The details
Tyler Twombly faces charges of assault, burglary, and felony possession of a weapon in a case that originated in Hillsborough Superior Court. The court also unsealed records related to a Judicial Conduct Committee investigation involving former Chief Justice Gordon MacDonald, who resigned after admitting to three code violations.
Timeline
November 2025: The Judicial Conduct Committee opened an investigation into the court.
July 24: Gordon MacDonald began a medical leave from his duties.
Monday: The court granted a stay of oral arguments and unsealed records.
Tuesday afternoon: The original date scheduled for the oral arguments.
Legal Context
This procedural delay follows a broader period of instability at the state high court, including the resignation of the Chief Justice. It reflects a significant departure from standard appellate timelines as the judiciary faces heightened scrutiny from the Judicial Conduct Committee.
Residents should note that this delay postpones the resolution of a major criminal appeal, impacting the timeline for the case of State vs. Twombly. The unsealing of judicial conduct records serves to provide the public with increased transparency regarding the current state of the court.
The takeaway
The stay of proceedings highlights the critical role judicial impartiality plays in maintaining the integrity of the state's appellate system. Ensuring a full and neutral panel remains a foundational requirement for due process in all criminal matters.
Further reading
For more background on the state's legal proceedings, visit the Criminal Justice section.
Live Poll
Do you trust that judicial panels in your area are composed with sufficient transparency and fairness?
