of Evidence 609(a)(2). See United States v. Amaechi, 991 F.2d 374, 378 n.1 (7th Cir.) (collecting cases from nine federal circuits holding that “stealing is not a crime of dishonesty for purposes of the Rules of Evidence”), cert. denied, 508 U.S. 979 (1993). Unlike crimes such as perjury or false statement, receiving stolen property is not obviously dishonest. In New Hampshire, a person commits the crime of receiving stolen property when: he receives, retains, or disposes of the property of another knowing that it has been stolen, or believing that it has probably been stolen, with a purpose to deprive the owner thereof. RSA 637:7,1 (2007). On its face, our statute does not impute dishonesty or mendacity to the crime. See United States v. Foster, 227 F.3d 1096, 1100 (9th Cir. 2000) (<HOLDING>); compare RSA 637:7, I, with RSA 637:4 (2007)
holding that receiving stolen property is not automatically a crime of dishonesty for purposes of rule 609a2 holding that an infamous crime under the arkansas constitution is a crime involving elements of deceit and dishonesty holding that a conviction for receiving stolen property based on possession must be vacated because it involved the same act constituting theft based on retaining property holding receiving stolen property is crimen falsi holding receiving stolen property is per se dishonest