 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Baker v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8800, No. 5045,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, February 22, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Superior court properly dismissed application for postconviction relief for failing to state a prima facie case of ineffective assistance of counsel. Appellant's postconviction counsel did not concede that appellant had no meritorious issues, but argued the opposite. Postconviction counsel was presumed to have acted competently.
|
|||||
| Brown v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-9022, No. 5048,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, February 22, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Officers did not interfere with defendant's exercise of her right under Alaska Stat. § 12.25.150(b) to contact a friend or relative following her DUI arrest because no testimony indicated that the officers engaged in any intrusive measure, other than remaining within an arm's length, that impaired defendant's conversation with her mother.
|
|||||
| Croughen v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8688, No. 5047,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, February 22, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: While it could not be known whether jury would have found that defendant committed assault in the heat of passion because jury was not instructed on heat of passion, defendant had opportunity to establish mitigating factors that were similar to heat of passion, such as provocation, and thus not instructing on heat of passion was not plain error.
|
|||||
| Esmailka v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-9051, No. 5049,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, February 22, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In application for post-conviction relief, trial court properly dismissed application because application was time barred by statute of limitations, pursuant to Alaska Stat. § 12.72.020, and applicant failed to explain his reasons for not complying with the statute of limitations.
|
|||||
| Fields v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8935, No. 5046,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, February 22, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court erred by summarily dismissing a request for postconviction relief based on ineffectiveness of counsel in failing to challenge a search warrant where counsel admitted that he was ineffective in failing to notice a time discrepancy in the search warrant, and the State did not assert that the time discrepancy was an honest, good faith mistake.
|
|||||
| Howarth v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8983, No. 5043,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, February 22, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In applicant's third request for post-conviction relief, which was based upon a claim of newly discovered evidence, trial court properly heldthat witness's statement was inadmissible under Alaska R. Evid. 804(b)(5) because witness was unavailable, and applicant failed to show that statement was reliable.
|
|||||
| Natalie D. v. State, Supreme Court No. S-11888, No. 1239,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, February 22, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Termination of mother's parental rights was proper where trial court's finding that children were children in need of aid under Alaska Stat. § 47.10.011 and that the mother had not remedied her personality disorder or drug problem within a reasonable time as provided in Alaska Stat. § 47.10.088(a)(1)(B) was supported by substantial evidence.
|
|||||
| Peter v. Progressive Corp., Supreme Court Nos. S-11416/S-11445, No. 1240,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, February 22, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a claim against an insurer alleging bad faith in refusing to pay on a policy, among other things, superior court properly awarded summary judgment for insurer because insurer had reasonable bases for denying injured child's father's underinsured motorist claim under policy's interpretation and interpretation of Alaska Stat. § 28.20.445.
|
|||||
| Yoder v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8842, No. 5044,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, February 22, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because appellant failed to prove the factual basis of ineffective assistance of counsel alleging a failure to apprise him of a potential plea agreement offered by the State in his application for post-conviction relief, the trial court properly denied his application.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
