 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Brown v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-9476, No. 5204,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, April 11, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a murder case where no probation was entered, as required by Alaska Stat. § 12.55.080, a superior court did not err by imposing 5 years of probation because the suspended sentence was incomplete, the imposition of a one-day probationary term was not required, and a delay in correcting the sentence did not limit the superior court's authority.
|
|||||
| Carlisle v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-9157, No. 5198,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, April 11, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's Sixth Amendment rights and the right to a jury trial under the Alaska Constitution were not violated by the imposition of a sentence after a judge found aggravating factors because reliance on a prior conviction and a juvenile conviction under Alaska Stat. § 12.55.155(c)(7), (c)(19) both complied with the holding in Blakely.
|
|||||
| Nelson v. State, Court of Appeals Nos. A-8879 & A-8899, No. 5200,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, April 11, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Petitioner for post-conviction relief claimed that his trial attorney incompetently failed to ask a trial judge to instruct jurors on substantial step for attempted sexual abuse, pursuant to Alaska Stat. § 11.31.100(a). Remand was necessary because claim's resolution involved additional issues, and judge's written decision did not provide answers.
|
|||||
| Petersen v. Petersen, Supreme Court No. S-12345, No. 1274,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, April 11, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because a mother presented a legitimate reason for relocation, a superior court properly did not hold this against her in conducting a best interest analysis under Alaska Stat. § 25.24.150(c); moreover, she was awarded sole legal and primary physical custody because of the father's discipline style and his probable inability to care for one child.
|
|||||
| Saucier v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-9525, No. 5202,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, April 11, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Even though defendant changed his mind several times about proceeding pro se in a case involving an alleged violation of a protective order, his waiver of counsel was knowing and voluntary where the trial court made inquiries into his ability to proceed; defendant was unable to vitiate the knowing waiver by asserting that he put on a poor defense.
|
|||||
| Shapoval v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8947, No. 5199,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, April 11, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Troopers did not violate defendant's Fourth Amendment rights when they entered his truck and retrieved a shotgun because he lied to the troopers about why he drove into the woods and he initially lied to the troopers about whether there was a firearm in his truck; the troopers could reasonably suspect that defendant might pose a danger to them.
|
|||||
| Snyder v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-9324, No. 5201,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, April 11, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: There was no plain error committed when an officer testified that an intoxicated woman, who reported defendant for bootlegging, was normally a quiet person, did not make trouble, and was believable because there was no violation of Alaska R. Evid. 608(a); the testimony was offered to show why the officer informed troopers of the allegations.
|
|||||
| Sprague v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-9766, No. 5206,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, April 11, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant was convicted of stalking in the first degree. Defendant's sentence of an aggravated presumptive term of five years with two years suspended was not excessive because defendant stipulated to aggravating factors. Judge found offense to be a serious case of stalking and defendant had several prior misdemeanor convictions.
|
|||||
| Tuck P. v. State, Supreme Court No. S-12342, No. 1273,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, April 11, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where the evidence showed that a father had a relatively short sobriety period, a long substance abuse period, and he failed to make progress on his case plan, a trial court did not err by terminating his parental rights for failing to remedy the conduct that put his child at risk under Alaska Stat. § 47.10.088.
|
|||||
| White v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-9044, No. 5203,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, April 11, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant was convicted of assault in the third degree and reckless endangerment arising out of a shooting incident. Defendant's bench trial was properly held because the record showed that defendant waived his right to a jury trial under U.S. Const. amend. VI and Alaska Const. art. I, 11.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
