What specific criminal charges have been filed against Tyler Boyer and in which jurisdiction?

1. What the New Hampshire court documents say: an indirect criminal contempt charge

The State of New Hampshire brought a case captioned The State of New Hampshire v. Tyler Boyer that appears in New Hampshire appellate and trial records; those documents describe a charge of “indirect criminal contempt” based on an alleged violation of a bail order condition and include pretrial litigation over a warrantless apartment search and a motion to suppress evidence ^{[1] [2]}. The New Hampshire Judicial Branch docket entry for 2014-0725 corresponds to that matter, confirming the local state-court context ^[6].

2. Jurisdiction for that charge: New Hampshire state courts

The complaint and subsequent appellate opinion are grounded in New Hampshire law and the New Hampshire Constitution (Part I, Article 19 is discussed in the opinion), establishing that the charge and litigation occurred in New Hampshire state jurisdiction rather than federal court ^{[1] [2]}.

3. What the New Hampshire records reveal about the issues in the case

The New Hampshire opinion focuses on constitutional search-and-seizure questions and the admissibility of evidence obtained during an alleged warrantless entry into the apartment shared by Boyer and a girlfriend; the core criminal allegation referenced in the opinion is the contempt charge tied to violating bail conditions ^{[1] [2]}.

4. Different people with similar names show up in other reporting — don’t conflate them

Separate items in the search results refer to a Tyler Bowyer (spelled with a “w”) who is identified in news coverage as a Turning Point Action/TPUSA affiliate and one of the Arizona “fake electors” indicted in connection with attempts to submit alternative electoral certificates; some outlets report pardons related to the federal aspects of those actions but note state indictments remain in Arizona ^{[3] [4] [5]}. Available sources treat Boyer (New Hampshire) and Bowyer (Arizona/TPUSA) as distinct individuals tied to different jurisdictions ^{[1] [3]}.

5. Limits of the available reporting — what is not in these sources

Available sources do not mention any other specific criminal counts, plea outcomes, sentencing details, or post-appeal dispositional facts for the New Hampshire matter beyond the contempt allegation and suppression motion ^{[1] [2]}. Available sources do not provide a direct connection between the New Hampshire Tyler Boyer and the Arizona-related Tyler Bowyer; any claim that they are the same person is not found in current reporting ^{[1] [3]}.

6. Why name variants and public-record aggregators complicate the record

Search results include multiple public-record aggregators listing many individuals named Tyler Boyer across states; those databases are not court records and can conflate identities, addresses, or ages ^{[7] [8]}. Journalists and researchers must rely on official court dockets and appellate opinions (such as the New Hampshire opinion and the state judicial docket) to confirm which charges pertain to which individual ^{[6] [1]}.

7. Competing perspectives and potential agendas in the sources

The New Hampshire court documents are legal records focused on procedural and constitutional issues ^{[1] [2]}. Political-news items about “Bowyer” arise in the context of reporting on election-related prosecutions and presidential pardons; those stories carry political framing and emphasize the limits of federal pardons over state prosecutions ^{[5] [4]}. Readers should note that public-interest outlets and partisan contexts can shape how name associations are presented ^{[3] [5]}.

If you want, I can pull the specific language from the New Hampshire opinion and the judicial docket entry (case number 2014-0725) into a concise timeline, or search for any later dispositions or sentencing records for the New Hampshire matter — current provided sources do not include those disposition details ^{[6] [1]}.