 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Armey v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8885, No. 5106,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, August 23, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Applicant for post-conviction relief (PCR) alleged that she received ineffective assistance of counsel from her first PCR attorney. Additional proceedings were needed because it appeared from the record that applicant never advanced an excuse, pursuant to Alaska Stat. § 12.72.020(b)(1), for failing to comply with statute of limitations.
|
|||||
| Linton v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-9213, No. 5108,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, August 23, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Applicant requested post-conviction relief, which was denied. Trial judge's determination of credibility of witnesses was supported by record, and findings were not clearly erroneous because applicant's trial attorney testified in an evidentiary hearing that he had not coerced applicant to waive right to testify.
|
|||||
| Reed v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8920, No. 5110,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, August 23, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: State presented sufficient evidence to grand jury to support indictment because it showed that defendant restrained his ex-girlfriend more than was incidental to third-degree assault; assault was complete when defendant burst through bedroom door waving revolver; half an hour lapsed before ex-girlfriend was able to jump through an open window.
|
|||||
| Steward v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-9409, No. 5109,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, August 23, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although defendant argued that under former Alaska Stat. § 12.55.125(e)(2) sentencing judge could not sentence him to unsuspended imprisonment that exceeded two-year presumptive term for second felony offender convicted of class C felony without finding that his case was exceptionally aggravated, the sentence imposed did not violate the statute.
|
|||||
| Williams v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8999, No. 5107,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, August 23, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: When defendant insisted on proceeding to trial on kidnapping and assault in the first degree charges, yet counsel did not feel ready, trial court did not commit plain error in proceeding to trial because trial judge and counsel both agreed it was defendant's right to proceed, and on record before appellate court, no error was committed.
|
|||||
| Cleveland v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-9054, No. 2060,
COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, August 25, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In review of defendant's sentence following his conviction for sexual assault, defendant's Sixth Amendment right to be tried by jury at sentencing was not violated because, pursuant to Alaska Stat. § 12.55.155(c), trial court found seven aggravators, any five of which could have been used to exceed presumptive term.
|
|||||
| Krize v. Krize, Supreme Court Nos. S-11842/S-11862, No. 6037,
SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, August 25, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In distribution of property pursuant to a divorce, trial court erred in applying transmutation principle to husband's property, which was considered separate under Alaska Stat. § 25.24.160, because evidence was insufficient to conclude that future income from husband's separate property was intended to be marital.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
