 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Carter v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8738, No. 4976,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, March 30, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In his unsuccessful petition for post-conviction relief from his conviction for controlled substance misconduct, defendant failed to state a prima facie claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. His argument that officer had no authority to reach into vehicle to retrieve defendant's gun case failed; under Alaska law, officer had such authority.
|
|||||
| Hodge v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8763, No. 4974,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, March 30, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant did not offer officer's statement to prove that his Alaska license was valid. Rather, he offered evidence that officer told him that his license was valid to refute mens rea element of crime of driving while his license was suspended, Alaska Stat. ¿ 28.15.291. Thus, under Alaska R. Evid. 801(c), hearsay objection was improperly sustained.
|
|||||
| Morkal v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-7796, No. 4975,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, March 30, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant did not object to hearsay statements of some witnesses that they had been told that he had been responsible for damaging their cars, the trial court did not err by admitting the testimony, and an officer's testimony concerning his efforts to contact defendant was not an impermissible comment on defendant's right to remain silent.
|
|||||
| Nicholia v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8643, No. 4977,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, March 30, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court correctly concluded that appellant failed to present a prima facie case of attorney incompetence on the issue of a potential attack on an indictment based on DNA evidence; there was every reason to expect that the State would be able to secure a second indictment even if appellant successfully challenged the first one.
|
|||||
| Whitesides v. State, Supreme Court No. S-11007, No. 1208,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, March 30, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a driver's license suspension case, appellant's claims that a hearing officer erroneously treated the issue of subsequent consent to take a breath test as an affirmative defense instead of regarding it as an element of the State's case and that the hearing officer acted arbitrarily in rejecting his testimony were without merit.
|
|||||
| Chase v. Chase, Supreme Court No. S-11447, No. 5881,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, April 1, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In custody dispute, trial court did not err because it properly considered factors under Alaska Stat. ¿ 25.24.150 by considering child's physical, emotional, mental, religious needs when awarding custody to mother. Trial court also did not err in finding property acquired after cohabitation began, but before marriage, to be marital property.
|
|||||
| Rick P. v. State, Supreme Court No. S-11461, No. 5882,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, April 1, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Sufficient evidence supported trial court's decision terminating the father's parental rights to his children because the evidence showed he was responsible for a "mental injury" to the son as provided in Alaska Stat. ¿ 47.10.011(8)(A) and he failed to maintain contact with his daughter for years, which was abandonment under ¿ 47.10.011(1).
|
|||||
| Bellamy v. Bellamy, Supreme Court No. S-10861, No. 1209,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, April 6, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: It was not clearly erroneous for the trial court to find that a house that was marital property; substantial evidence supported the trial court's findings that the parties paid the mortgage out of marital funds and spent substantial amounts for various improvements.
|
|||||
| Hertz v. Phillips, Supreme Court No. S-11328, No. 1210,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, April 6, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The superior court did not err in dismissing an inmate's administrative appeal regarding an income withholding order issued by the Alaska Child Support Enforcement Division (CSED); Alaska Stat. ¿ 25.27.250 authorized CSED to collect arrearages through an income withholding order, and CSED was not collecting more than was permitted by law.
|
|||||
| Schmidt v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8669, No. 4978,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, April 6, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant could not claim that pursuing and shooting a bear for reasons other than defense of life or property was constitutionally protected conduct that legislature could not regulate. Thus, definition of "take" in Alaska Stat. ¿ 16.05.940(34) did not violate his due process rights, and his convictions for fish and game violations were proper.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Contact Us |
| Copyright® 2009 LexisNexis , a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. |
