CRIMINAL LAW
Court of Appeals of Alaska (2024)
Lauren Beizer
In Drummer v. State of Alaska, 545 P.3d 452 (Alaska Ct. App. 2024), the court of appeals held that there was no self-incrimination violation at the trial court level, there was no abuse of discretion found at the trial court level, there was no error on admitting evidence of past violence, and that there was a proper objection to the presentence report. (Id. at 452). The State pursued charges against an individual, Drummer, who violated a restraining order by physically assaulting an ex-girlfriend. (Id. at 453). The victim was walking roadside when Drummer ran towards her, threw her into a ditch, pinned her down, and choked her until she went limp. (Id. at 454). Drummer was brought up on a jury trial and was convicted of third-degree assault and of violating a restraining order. (Id.). Four claims were raised on appeal: (1) the court violated Drummer’s right against self-incrimination, (2) the court wrongly allowed into evidence certain text messages, (3) the court wrongly allowed the victim to testify to prior incidents of violence, and (4) that the presentence report was inaccurate. (Id. at 453-54). The court reasoned that: (1) precedent did not extend to the facts of the case that would mean Drummer’s right against self-incrimination was violated, (2) the superior court did not abuse it’s discretion in allowing in certain text messages due to their probative value, (3) the superior court allowed the victim to testify regarding prior assault, but it proved harmless to Drummer’s defense, and (4) the presentence report must be adjudicated at the superior court level to determine whether the facts were accurate. (Id. at 455–58). The court of appeals affirmed both Drummer’s criminal convictions and sentence but remanded the case back down to the superior court for further litigation regarding the presentence report. (Id. at 458).
