 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Albers v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-7446, No. 1940,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, June 18, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Police were permitted to make defendant open his hand during an investigatory stop. When a small rock of crack cocaine fell out, defendant was properly convicted of fourth-degree misconduct involving a controlled substance.
|
|||||
| Cook Schuhmann & Groseclose, Inc. v. Brown & Root, Inc., Supreme Court No. S-10922, No. S-5817,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, June 18, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a trustee conducted a foreclosure sale for a first deed of trust beneficiary, complying with the terms of the deed of trust, the postponement of the sale to allow bidders to collect more money did not violate Alaska law.
|
|||||
| Goldsbury v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8528, No. 1937,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, June 18, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The superior court erred in dismissing an inmate's petition for post-conviction relief without requiring his attorney to give a detailed explanation of why the attorney concluded that the inmate had no arguable claims for relief.
|
|||||
| Herrin v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8553, No. 1938,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, June 18, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant's probation was revoked, the sentencing judge had no discretion on the question of whether defendant's term of probation should have been tolled during the pendency of the petition to revoke probation. The tolling was required by law.
|
|||||
| Mech. Contrs. of Alaska, Inc. v. State, Supreme Court No. S-10823,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, June 18, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Ridlington v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8533, No. 1939,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, June 18, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant knew at arraignment he was charged in separate documents with misdemeanor and felony DWI arising from the same conduct, Double Jeopardy Clause did not bar prosecution of felony charge if defendant pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charge.
|
|||||
| State v. Greenpeace, Inc., Supreme Court No. S-10409, No. 5816,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, June 18, 2004, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Public interest exception to mootness doctrine justified judicial review of environmental group's due process claim, but not the merits of its claim as to a state department's order lifting a stay on a water use permit issued to oil company.
|
|||||
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. |
