 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Beattie v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8702, No. 4999,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, August 17, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Officer did not violate defendant's right to contact an attorney before submitting to a breath test, Alaska Stat. § 12.25.150, where the officer told defendant before he refused a test that he could call an attorney, defendant declined the offer, indicating that he had already spoken with an attorney and his attorney told him not to take the test.
|
|||||
| Heacock v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8817, No. 5001,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, August 17, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although defendant had a constitutional right to self-represention, the trial court properly denied his request because he was unusually disruptive, and the evidence was sufficient to support his DUI conviction under Alaska Stat. § 28.35.030(a), as witness testimony evidence did not afford a basis for questioning the sufficiency of the evidence.
|
|||||
| Kammeyer v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8745, No. 5000,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, August 17, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Evidence was sufficient to prove that defendant's hands were a dangerous instrument, Alaska Stat. § 11.81.900, where the victim testified that defendant choked him with such force that he could not breathe, that his nose started to bleed, and that it felt as if his face was "swollen."
|
|||||
| Middendorf v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8913, No. 5002,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, August 17, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where appellant was convicted of assault in the first degree, he faced a presumptive sentence of 10 years under Alaska Stat. § 12.55.125(c)(3); he was sentenced to 10 years' confinement with 2 years suspended. The district court properly denied appellant's motion under Alaska R. Crim. P. 35(a), because the sentence was not illegal.
|
|||||
| Ellison v. Plumbers & Steam Fitters Union Local 375, Supreme Court No. S-10849, No. 5934,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, August 19, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment was properly entered in favor of a union in a sexual harassment claim under Alaska Stat. § 18.80.220 because the evidence showed nothing more than inaction in the face of knowledge of discrimination; a union member never asked the union to file a grievance on her behalf.
|
|||||
| Ned v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8721, No. 2003,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, August 19, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In appeal of conviction and sentence for manslaughter, defendant's Miranda rights were not violated because he was not in custody at time he made statements. Defendant's right to jury trial was not violated at sentencing, but part of sentence was unlawful because judge improperly imposed aggravating factor under Alaska Stat. § 12.55.155(c)(4).
|
|||||
| Jesse P. v. Dep't of Health & Soc. Servs., Office of Children's Servs., Supreme Court No. S-11626, No. 1223,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, August 24, 2005, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a case where a father changed his mind after stating an intention to relinquish his parental rights, termination was proper because a failure to make active efforts to reunite the family under 25 U.S.C.S. § 1912(d), Alaska Stat. § 47.10.011, and Alaska CINA R. 18(c)(1)(B) was inconsequential based on the father's failure to cooperate.
|
|||||
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. |
