CRIMINAL LAW
Court of Appeals of Alaska (2024)
Holly Merrill
In Burns v. State, 543 P.3d 1013 (Alaska Ct. App. 2024), the court of appeals held that AS 17.38, which legalized the personal use of marijuana and operation of licensed marijuana businesses, did not implicitly repeal AS 11.71.190(b). (Id. at 1018–19). The earlier law declared marijuana a controlled substance and criminalized “marijuana-related conduct.” (Id. at 1017). Defendant Burns operated an unlicensed marijuana distribution business from which he earned over $700,000. (Id. at 1016). Burns was charged and convicted of “first-degree misconduct involving a controlled substance.” (Id. at 1014, 1016). That offense makes it a felony to “obtain substantial income or resources by committing a series of five or more violations of AS 11.71.” (Id. at 1016). Burns was found to have violated AS 11.71 six times, one for each time he had delivered more than one ounce of marijuana. (Id. at 1015–16). On appeal, Burns argued that those transactions were lawful because AS 17.38 implicitly repealed AS 17.38. (Id. at 1017). He argued that the new law conflicted with the earlier statute, and thus its language superseded those conflicting portions. (Id.). Specifically, he contended that the exceptions provided in AS 17.38 allowing for personal use and legal marijuana businesses conflicted with the classification of marijuana as a controlled substance in the earlier law. (Id.). In view of the “totality of the relevant legislative framework,” the court found that the differences between the two statutes were not irreconcilable. (Id.). It found that the new statute was a narrow exception, in line with the legislature’s intent not to legalize marijuana completely, but to regulate it. (Id. at 1018–19). For these reasons, the court held that the ballot initiative was entirely compatible with previous law. (Id. at 1019). Consequently, Burns’ conviction for first degree misconduct involving a controlled substance was upheld. (Id. at 1021).
