Alaska, October, 2006, State Case law

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!

State Courts - Alaska - October 19 - October 27, 2006

Christopherson v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-9339, No. 5128, COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, October 19, 2006, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Defendant was found, with an alcoholic drink, by state trooper in a bunkhouse. Trial court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress because bunkhouse had doors that were unlocked, which led to a central corridor; it was reasonable to enter doors and walk down corridor. Trooper did not need warrant pursuant to Fourth Amendment.

Search Cases for Free

Joseph v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-8961, No. 5126, COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, October 19, 2006, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Defendant was released on probation after he entered a guilty plea in a drug case. Defendant was charged with new offense, and probation was revoked. When defendant conceded aggravator pursuant to Alaska Stat. ? 12.55.155(c)(10), Sixth Amendment right to jury at sentencing was not implicated because issue was one of law, not fact.

Search Cases for Free

Vonscheele v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-9498, No. 5127, COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, October 19, 2006, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Where defendant admitted several violations of his probation, the trial court did not err by imposing the remaining 27 months of his suspended sentence for assault in the third degree and driving while under the influence, Alaska Stat. ?? 11.41.220(a)(1)(B), 28.35.030(a). Defendant had poor prospects for rehabilitation and was a risk to the public.

Search Cases for Free

Anderson v. State, Court of Appeals Nos. A-9003/A-9005, No. 2068, COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, October 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: When defendants harbored and concealed their son, and when they lied to the officers about his whereabouts, knowing that the officers were attempting to arrest him for violating his felony probation, and acting with the intent to hinder his punishment, defendants committed first-degree hindering prosecution under Alaska Stat. ? 11.56.770(a)(1).

Search Cases for Free

Lightle v. State, Supreme Court No. S-11719, No. 6065, SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, October 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Record contained substantial evidence that listing agent misrepresented home's availability by: (1) inaccurately describing the home as an "active listing;" (2) prematurely telling the buyer that the originally accepted offer had been rescinded; and (3) incorrectly assuring the buyer that her own offer had been accepted and that the house was hers.

Search Cases for Free

Miller v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-9484, No. 2069, COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, October 20, 2006, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Defendant entered a guilty plea to refusing to submit to a chemical test, pursuant to Alaska Stat. ? 28.35.032(a), but defendant's motion to suppress should have been granted. Officer did not have reasonable suspicion to stop car because a verbal domestic dispute, alone, did not justify a detention.

Search Cases for Free

Meyer v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-9466, No. 5129, COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, October 25, 2006, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Alaska sentencing judge's adding one year onto the presumptive six-year sentence of defendant, who was convicted of downloading children's pornography in violation of his Oregon parole, was not unreasonable; defendant had four prior felony convictions and conceded the application of the aggravating factors in Alaska Stat. ? 12.55.155(c)(15), (20).

Search Cases for Free

Denardo v. Bax, Supreme Court Nos. S-11487/S-11508, No. 6066, SUPREME COURT OF ALASKA, October 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Summary judgment was affirmed where defendant female employee's statements to coworkers that she was worried that plaintiff male employee was stalking her was subject to a conditional privilege against his defamation claim, and did not abuse the privilege. An order limiting discovery under Alaska R. Civ. P. 26 was not an abuse of discretion.

Search Cases for Free

Smart v. State, Court of Appeals No. A-9025, Court of Appeals No. A-9037, No. 2070, COURT OF APPEALS OF ALASKA, October 27, 2006, Decided
View this case - free

Overview: Teague retroactivity test limited authority of federal courts but not state courts, thus appeals court was bound to apply retroactivity test adopted by Alaska Supreme Court and concluded that Blakely rule requirement of proof beyond a reasonable doubt should be applied retroactively to defendants whose convictions were final prior to the rule.

Search Cases for Free

Communities Portal