In State v. Mayfield,[1] the court of appeals affirmed a decision to grant the defendant’s motion to dismiss a charge of attempted second-degree sexual assault on the grounds that the state had failed to prove intent to use or threaten force to achieve sexual contact. While at a movie, twenty-one-year-old Thomas Mayfield touched a fourteen-year-old Continue Reading »
In State v. Thompson,[1] the supreme court held that in sexual abuse and assault cases, distinct acts of penetration may support separate convictions when the penetrating body part or object changes, or when the penetrated orifice changes. Thompson was convicted of multiple counts of sexual abuse of a minor. The court of appeals merged separate Continue Reading »
In State v. Tofelogo,[1] the supreme court held that the domestic violence aggravating factor has broad applicability in determining the sentencing of a guilty individual. Teila Tofelogo accidentally stabbed his sober living group home roommate, Dennis Fathke, after horse-playing with a knife. Tofelogo pled guilty to negligent homicide and stipulated to the applicability of the Continue Reading »
In Swartz v. Municipality of Anchorage,[1] the court of appeals held that the district court erred in imposing jail time for an offender’s uncompleted hours of community work service. Swartz pled guilty to driving with her license suspended or revoked. Her sentence included eighty hours of mandatory community work service to be completed within six Continue Reading »
In Taffe v. First National Bank of Alaska,[1] the supreme court held the statute of limitations for a misrepresentation begins to run when the plaintiffs should reasonably have discovered an appreciable injury from the misrepresentation. Taffe and Lehner borrowed money in the form of two loans from First National Bank of Alaska in 2006 to Continue Reading »
In Torgerson v. State,[1] the court of appeals held that a judicial officer must assess a defendant’s conditions of relief at a first bail review hearing. Torgerson was charged with sexual abuse of a minor in the district court. The judge imposed non-monetary conditions agreed to by the parties, but also set a higher monetary Continue Reading »
In Wahl v. State,[1] the supreme court held that the former-testimony exception to the hearsay rule does not require the opposing party to have had an identical motive to develop the testimony during the previous proceeding; it further held that the superior court did not abuse its discretion in ruling that Wahl did not used Continue Reading »
In Williams v. State,[1] the court of appeals held that it was not plain error for the trial judge to give a jury instruction that did not require factual unanimity on the specific way in which Williams violated a protective order. Williams was convicted of two counts of violating protective orders that prohibited her from Continue Reading »
In Amy S. v. State,[1] the supreme court held that when a party’s due process rights are violated, a failure by that party to make a plausible claim of prejudice resulting from that violation requires a finding of harmless error. The Department of Health and Social Services, Office of Children’s Services (OCS) filed an emergency Continue Reading »
In Club SinRock, LLC v. Municipality of Anchorage,[1] the supreme court held that a municipal closing-hours restriction applies to adult cabarets, but, under strict scrutiny, violates the Alaska Constitution’s free speech clause. Although a municipal ordinance required adult-oriented establishments to be closed between 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m., Club SinRock, an adult cabaret featuring nude Continue Reading »
