 |
|
 |
|
|
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-7877, No. 4590,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, July 17, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court did not err in refusing to allow defendant to conduct an evidentiary hearing to examine whether grand jury had been exposed to extraneous prejudicial information by a juror, who was aware of defendant's prior criminal record.
|
|||||
| Davenport v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8057, No. 4593,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, July 17, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court of appeals did not have jurisdiction to consider defendant's claim attacking trial court's exercise of its sentencing discretion, as defendant received felony sentence of less than two years; appeal was referred to state's supreme court.
|
|||||
| Firey v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-7327, No. 4589,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, July 17, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court properly denied defendant's motion for new trial as foreman did not deceive court by his answers during voir dire; defendant's double jeopardy rights were not violated as the legislature intended different penalties for the two crimes.
|
|||||
| Henry v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8002, No. 4592,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, July 17, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant could not establish that he exercised due diligence in filing his claim for post-conviction relief, defendant was not entitled to an exemption from the time limitations that applied to post-conviction relief petitions.
|
|||||
| Lolnitz v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8137, No. 4594,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, July 17, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court, in denying murder defendant's eligibility for discretionary parole for 30 years, failed to make specific findings justifying restriction on parole; remand was necessary so that trial judge could address issue directly.
|
|||||
| Miller v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-7970, No. 4591,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, July 17, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial judge had the authority to require defendant to abstain from alcohol as part of his probation, and was not clearly erroneous when she imposed all of his suspended time after defendant admitted consuming alcohol.
|
|||||
| Smith v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8235, No. 4595,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, July 17, 2002, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentence for felony refusal to submit to a chemical test was vacated, where the superior court judge's findings did not justify a sentence that exceeded the Austin limit.
|
|||||
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. |
