CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Court of Appeals of Alaska (2023)
Allyson Barkley
In Larson v. State, No. A-13731, 2023 WL 2783943 (Alaska Ct. App. Apr. 5, 2023), the court of appeals held Alvarez-Perdomo v. State did not create a new rule on admissibility of juror affidavits. (Id. at 1). Loren J. Larson Jr. was convicted of a double homicide in 1998. (Id.). He had since filed multiple appeals, arguing that he was due a new trial because of juror misconduct. (Id. at 1). In 2001, Larson filed for post-conviction relief under Alaska Civil Rule 60(b) and the motion was dismissed. (Id.). He appealed the dismissal and argued that the Alaska Supreme Court’s decision in Alvarez-Perdomo had changed the law in his favor. (Id.) The supreme court held in Alvarez-Perdomo that compelling a defendant to testify in a criminal trial constituted structural error, which requires reversal on appeal. (Id.). Larson contended that affidavits considering his decision not to testify were evidence of structural error, because jurors are fact-finders. (Id.). The court of appeals did not find this persuasive because the affidavits were not admissible under Alaska Evidence Rule 606(b). (Id.). Therefore, Alvarez-Perdomo did not change the law controlling Larson’s case. (Id.). Affirming the lower court’s decision, the court of appeals held Alvarez-Perdomo did not change the controlling law on admissibility of juror affidavits. (Id.).
