New Hampshire Supreme Court overturns Adam Montgomery’s second-degree murder conviction
ON MULTIPLE CHARGES AND THAT’S THE CRUX OF THE ISSUE HERE. IN THIS MORNING’S FILING – THE COURT SAID THE MURDER CHARGE SHOULD HAVE BEEN TRIED SEPARATELY FROM ASSAULT CHARGE, FINDING THERE WAS A REAL RISK THAT JURORS COULD HAVE BEEN INFLUENCED BY EVIDENCE TIED TO THE ASSAULT ALLEGATIONS. BECAUSE OF THAT, THE JUSTICES SENT THE MURDER CHARGE BACK FOR FURTHER PROCEEDINGS. MONTGOMERY’S LAWYERS HAD REQUESTED ALL OF HIS CONVICTIONS BE OVERTURNED, INCLUDING THAT SECOND DEGREE ASSAULT CHARGE, FALSIFYING PHYSICAL EVIDENCE, WITNESS TAMPERING AND ABUSE OF A CORPSE. THOSE CONVICTIONS WERE UPHELD. AGAIN, THE HEADLINE HERE, THE STATE SUPREME COURT HAS OVERTURNED ADAM MONTGOMERY’S MURDER CONVICTION. NOW, THIS WAS A 15 PAGE DOCUMENT OR SO. IT CAME DOWN NOT LONG AGO. A LOT TO SIFT THROUGH. SO WE ARE BRINGING IN AN EXPERT, FORMER ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL JESSIE O’NEILL JOINS US LIVE. NOW, JESSIE, YOU WORKED ON THE MONTGOMERY CASE IN ITS EARLY STAGES. FIRST QUESTION HERE IS WHAT DO YOU WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THIS? WELL, THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME. IT’S A TOUGH DECISION TO READ, BUT IT’S THE JOB OF OUR COURTS AND SPECIFICALLY OUR SUPREME COURT TO MAKE SURE THINGS ARE DONE RIGHT. AND FAIRNESS IS MAINTAINED. SO WHILE I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO SEE THE MURDER CONVICTION STAND, THE SUPREME COURT DETERMINED THAT THINGS SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE DIFFERENTLY. AND THAT’S THAT’S THEIR ROLE. THEY GET TO MAKE THAT DECISION. LET’S TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT RULING. AND CAN YOU JUST EXPLAIN FOR OUR VIEWERS, DID THE COURT SAY HE’S INNOCENT OR JUST THAT THE TRIAL SHOULD HAVE BEEN HANDLED DIFFERENTLY? LET’S MAKE THAT CLEAR FOR OUR VIEWERS. SO WHAT THE COURT SAID IS THAT THE TRIAL SHOULD HAVE BEEN HANDLED DIFFERENTLY. AND SPECIFICALLY, THE COURT SAID THAT THE STRENGTH OF THE ASSAULT CHARGE, WHERE THERE WERE MULTIPLE WITNESSES WHO EACH CORROBORATED EACH OTHER, THE JURORS COULD HAVE IMPROPERLY RELIED ON THE STRENGTH OF THAT CHARGE TO BOLSTER THE WAY THAT THEY LOOKED AT ADAM WITH RESPECT TO THE MURDER CHARGE, WHERE THE ONLY REAL EVIDENCE THAT HE WAS THE ONE WHO KILLED HARMONY WAS THE TESTIMONY OF KAYLA MONTGOMERY. THERE WAS A LOT OF CORROBORATION OF KAYLA’S TESTIMONY OF THE STEPS THAT ADAM TOOK AFTER THE MURDER TO CONCEAL AND EVENTUALLY DISPOSE OF HARMONY’S BODY. BUT IN TERMS OF KAYLA’S TESTIMONY AS TO WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED IN THE CAR WHEN ADAM MURDERED HARMONY, KAYLA WAS THE ONLY WITNESS WITH NO CORROBORATION. SO THE COURT SAID THAT BECAUSE OF THE STRENGTH OF THE ASSAULT CHARGE, THE JURORS COULD HAVE IMPROPERLY RELIED ON THAT TO BOLSTER THE STRENGTH OF THE MURDER CHARGE. DIDN’T NECESSARILY SAY THAT ADAM WAS INNOCENT, JUST SAID THAT THE TRIAL SHOULD HAVE BEEN HANDLED DIFFERENTLY, AND THAT THOSE TWO CHARGES SHOULDN’T HAVE BEEN TRIED IN THE SAME TRIAL. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR BREAKING THAT DOWN. MAKES A LOT OF SENSE. SO NOW WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? SO THERE’S A COUPLE OPTIONS UNDER SUPREME COURT RULES. THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE STATE TO FILE WHAT’S CALLED A MOTION TO RECONSIDER, WHERE THEY WOULD HAVE TO POINT TO SPECIFIC POINTS OF LAW AND ARGUE THAT THE SUPREME COURT GOT THOSE THINGS WRONG. FRANKLY, THOSE MOTIONS DON’T OFTEN HAVE A HIGH CHANCE OF SUCCESS, BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT I’M SURE THE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OFFICE WILL ASSESS AND EVALUATE. IF THEY TRY TO FILE A MOTION TO RECONSIDER AND IT FAILS, OR IF THEY JUST DECIDE NOT TO GO THAT ROUTE, THEN THE OTHER OPTION WOULD BE DECIDING WHETHER OR NOT THEY WANT TO RETRY. ADAM MONTGOMERY FOR THE SECOND DEGREE MURDER CHARGE. AS YOU NOTED EARLIER, ALL OF HIS OTHER CONVICTIONS STAND THE ASSAULT CHARGE, ABUSE OF A CORPSE, TAMPERING WITH EVIDENCE, THE OTHER CHARGES HE WAS CONVICTED OF AREN’T BACK IN PLAY. BUT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OFFICE WOULD HAVE TO DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT TO HAVE ANOTHER TRIAL, JUST ON THE SECOND DEGREE MURDER CHARGE. YOU KNOW, A LOT OF GRANITE STATERS, JESSE, WERE SO INVESTED IN THIS CASE AND WATCHED THIS TRIAL DAY IN AND DAY OUT. IT WAS HARD. IT WAS A LONG TRIAL. COULD WE SEE IT ALL OVER AGAIN? WE. VERY WELL COULD, I WOULD GUESS, BASED ON THE DEPRAVITY OF THE FACTS IN THIS CASE, BASED ON THE PUBLIC SCRUTINY OF THIS CASE, BASED ON WHAT THIS CASE MEANS TO THE SYSTEMS THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO BE IN PLACE TO PROTECT OUR CHILDREN AS CHILDREN OF THE COMMUNITY, I WOULD GUESS THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OFFICE IS PROBABLY HEAVILY INVESTED IN CONTINUING TO PURSUE THIS CASE. AND IF THE MOTION TO RECONSIDER IS UNSUCCESSFUL, I’M PRETTY CONFIDENT IN SAYING THAT, THAT I’M WE’RE PROBABLY GOING TO SEE ANOTHER ADAM MONTGOMERY TRIAL. WHAT COULD YOU SAY OR WHAT WOULD YOU SAY TO FOLKS WHO DO WANT TO FOLLOW ALONG, BUT SAY IT’S JUST TOO MUCH TO TAKE? WHAT WOULD YOUR ADVICE BE FOR THEM? IT IS A VERY HARD CASE TO TAKE THE FACTS OF THIS CASE, WHICH ARE SPELLED OUT IN QUITE GRAPHIC DETAIL IN THE SUPREME COURT’S OPINION TODAY. THE FACTS ARE VERY HARD TO HEAR, AND THEY’RE HARD TO READ, AND THEY’RE HARD. HARD TO UNDERSTAND HOW THAT KIND OF THING CAN HAPPEN. SO MY ADVICE WOULD BE TO BE CAREFUL. I UNDERSTAND, SPEAKING TO THE PUBLIC THAT YOU’RE PROBABLY INTERESTED IN THIS CASE. RIGHTFULLY SO, BUT BE CAREFUL BECAUSE THERE’S THINGS HERE THAT CAN REALLY IMPACT YOU. AND DON’T BE AFRAID TO TALK ABOUT THE WAY THAT THOSE THINGS MIGHT BE IMPACTING YOU, WHETHER IT’S WITH A FRIEND OR A FAMILY MEMBER OR EVEN A PROFESSIONAL, BECAUSE IT’S AN IMPORTANT CASE. BUT THEY’RE HARD FACTS TO HEAR. IT’S SO TRUE. AND IT’S GREAT ADVICE BECAUSE I KNOW HOW THIS CASE IMPACTED EVERYONE HERE IN THE NEWSROOM AS WELL. LAST QUESTION FOR YOU. IF THE MURDER CONVICTION WAS OVERTURNED, WHY THEN IS HE STILL IN PRISON? BECAUSE THERE WERE THOSE OTHER CONVICTIONS IN PLACE THAT WERE NOT OVERTURNED. I’M NOT ABLE TO DO THE MATH IMMEDIATELY ABOUT HOW LONG HIS SENTENCE WAS ON THOSE CHARGES, BUT THERE WERE CONVICTIONS WITH SENTENCES ON THE OTHER CHARGES. THERE’S ALSO GOING TO BE A LIVE ISSUE OF BAIL, BECAUSE HE’S BACK TO BASICALLY A PRETRIAL STATUS ON THE MURDER CASE. SO THERE’S AN ISSUE OF BAIL, AND HE COULD POTENTIALLY JUST BE DETAINED PRETRIAL ON THAT MATTER, AS MANY PEOPLE WHO ARE ACCUSED OF MURDER ARE DETAINED PRETRIAL. THAT’S THE BOTTOM LINE HERE. JESSE WOULD BE DO YOU SEE ADAM MONTGOMERY GETTING OUT OF PRISON ANYTIME SOON? I WOULDN’T EXPECT IT, NO. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. FORMER ASSISTANT ATTORNEY GENERAL JESSIE O’NEILL, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR JOINING US THIS MORNING AND FOR ALL OF YOUR INSIGHT. AGAIN, IF YOU’RE JUST JOINING US, THE SUPREME COURT HAS OVERTURNED ADAM MONTGOMERY’S MURDER CONVICTION IN THE DEATH OF HIS DAUGHTER, HARMONY. WE WILL HAVE SO MUCH MORE ON
New Hampshire Supreme Court overturns Adam Montgomery’s second-degree murder conviction
Updated: 10:45 AM EDT Jun 11, 2026
The New Hampshire Supreme Court reversed the second-degree murder conviction for Adam Montgomery on Thursday morning. Montgomery was found guilty in 2024 of second-degree murder in the death of his 5-year-old daughter Harmony Montgomery in 2019. He was sentenced to 56 years to life in prison.>> View the ruling (.pdf)In Thursday’s ruling, justices reversed his second-degree murder conviction and affirmed his convictions for falsifying physical evidence, witness tampering and abuse of a corpse. >> View a timeline of the Harmony Montgomery caseThe state’s highest court heard the appeal in October. During that hearing, a lawyer for Adam Montgomery argued that he should have been tried separately on the assault and murder charges, that the court should not have allowed testimony from Kayla Montgomery and that police body camera video should not have been shown at the trial. Regarding the joining of the assault charge and murder charge in the same trial, the state had argued that “any error with respect to joinder was also harmless as to the second degree murder charge because the ‘state’s case and the evidence of the defendant’s guilt overwhelming.'” Justices disagreed with this assertion. “We conclude that the misjoinder of offenses was not harmless as to the homicide charge. Accordingly, we reverse the defendant’s conviction of second-degree murder,” justices wrote.“It was a tough decision to read, but it’s the job of our courts, specifically our Supreme Court, to make sure things are done right, and fairness is maintained. So, while I would have liked to see the murder conviction stand, the Supreme Court determined that things should have been done differently, and that’s their role to make that decision,” Jesse O’Neill, former assistant attorney general, said.“So, what the court said is that the trial should have been handled differently, and specifically the court said the strength of the assault charge, where there were multiple witnesses, who each corroborated each other, the jurors could have improperly relied on the strength of that charge to bolster the way that they looked at Adam with respect to the murder charge were the only real evidence that he was the one who killed Harmony was the testimony of Kayla Montgomery,” O’Neill said. This story will be updated.
MANCHESTER, N.H. —
The New Hampshire Supreme Court reversed the second-degree murder conviction for Adam Montgomery on Thursday morning.
Montgomery was found guilty in 2024 of second-degree murder in the death of his 5-year-old daughter Harmony Montgomery in 2019. He was sentenced to 56 years to life in prison.
In Thursday’s ruling, justices reversed his second-degree murder conviction and affirmed his convictions for falsifying physical evidence, witness tampering and abuse of a corpse.
>> View a timeline of the Harmony Montgomery case
The state’s highest court heard the appeal in October. During that hearing, a lawyer for Adam Montgomery argued that he should have been tried separately on the assault and murder charges, that the court should not have allowed testimony from Kayla Montgomery and that police body camera video should not have been shown at the trial.
Regarding the joining of the assault charge and murder charge in the same trial, the state had argued that “any error with respect to joinder was also harmless as to the second degree murder charge because the ‘state’s case and the evidence of the defendant’s guilt [were] overwhelming.'” Justices disagreed with this assertion.
“We conclude that the misjoinder of offenses was not harmless as to the homicide charge. Accordingly, we reverse the defendant’s conviction of second-degree murder,” justices wrote.
“It was a tough decision to read, but it’s the job of our courts, specifically our Supreme Court, to make sure things are done right, and fairness is maintained. So, while I would have liked to see the murder conviction stand, the Supreme Court determined that things should have been done differently, and that’s their role to make that decision,” Jesse O’Neill, former assistant attorney general, said.
“So, what the court said is that the trial should have been handled differently, and specifically the court said the strength of the assault charge, where there were multiple witnesses, who each corroborated each other, the jurors could have improperly relied on the strength of that charge to bolster the way that they looked at Adam with respect to the murder charge were the only real evidence that he was the one who killed Harmony was the testimony of Kayla Montgomery,” O’Neill said.
This story will be updated.