Recently I had the “residency” charge against me dropped by Keene police prosecutor Jean M. Kilham. Kilham had wanted me convicted for allegedly being a “resident” and not having gotten an NH driver’s license. In order to convict me, Kilham would have had to have proven I am a resident, which is a legal term that has certain obligations attached to it, like registering cars and getting an NH driver’s license. The most obvious question is what obligation do I have to become a resident at all? Is it simply that men with guns are threatening me? Even by their own rules, RSA 21:6 makes it clear that a different legal status exists in NH’s system called “inhabitant”. It has the exact same definition as resident, but without all the requirements that come with residency (Lots of statues are written to apply only to residents, not inhabitants.) The difference between “resident” and “inhabitant” is that one must intend to be a resident. This is borne out by their own statute, RSA 259:88 that states:
no person shall be deemed to be a resident who claims residence in any other state for any purpose
That makes it pretty clear that residency is a status that people must seek. If I can avoid being an NH resident simply by claiming residency in another state, then that means I would have to change my mind, should I want to become a NH resident. I have yet to see any reason to become an NH resident rather than an inhabitant. It seems to me that residency only comes with obligations and no benefits. If you can think of a benefit, please post a comment.
Kilham admitted to me when she nolle prossed the charge that she was going to send her information to the DMV in NH because the burden of proof is much lower at a DMV administrative hearing. (That’s her admitting she has a lousy case.) She said she hopes they pull my “privileges” to drive for a year. Sure enough, I received a packet of information this week informing me that I am “ordered” to appear on Friday, July 26th at 1pm at the DMV offices in Concord. Kilham informed me that she and her witnesses would not need to be physically attend as they can be “there” via a video link. Gosh, that’s not clear evidence of two classes of humans, is it? I have to drive for two hours in Concord – they get to stay in their office in Keene. I plan on objecting to that.
Regardless, in the filing with the DMV, Kilham claims I have “established residency” by doing certain things. Beyond the obvious rebuttal that I choose residency elsewhere, I will enumerate Kilham’s accusations and provide rebuttals:
- Registering to Vote – I have registered to vote, but those registration forms say nothing about residency. One can be an inhabitant of NH and vote here – residency is not a requirement. Even the “Domicile Affidavit” that I signed to register to vote doesn’t say anything about residency.
- Running for Office – When I ran for school board in 2013 the “Declaration of Candidacy” form did say “I reside”, but this is inaccurate. Just because a bureaucracy makes a form doesn’t mean that it is fully in line with the statutes. Fact is, it’s not a requirement to be a resident of NH to run for office. Indeed, on the school board’s form, I crossed out “reside” and wrote in “am domiciled”. One can be domiciled without being a resident. Despite this change to the text, the form was accepted and I was placed on the ballot.
- Owning a Home – Kilham includes a copy of a deed with my name on it as further alleged proof of residency. Even if having a home somewhere proved residency (it doesn’t), the point is moot now, since I no longer own a home. The home in question is now owned by the Shire Free Church.
Kilham’s then gets to her main legal assertion. The reason she says I should no longer be able to drive in New Hampshire is that I have “misused or abused my driving privilege”. She cites RSA 263:56 I (h):
Is a hazard to the public safety as evidenced by proper evidence or information received from a law enforcement agency of misconduct or misuse or abuse of driving privileges
She includes in her large packet of “evidence” the fact that I was convicted for “misuse of plates” in 2010 as her evidence of my alleged “abuse”. I have never been charged with driving dangerously and never been in an accident. I currently am facing a speeding ticket out of Antrim.
I’ve never been the victim of a DMV hearing before, so this should be interesting. Feel free to come out and watch 7/26 @ 1pm at the DMV offices in Concord. Here’s a facebook event.
