Criminal Law

  • Whalen v. Whalen In Whalen v. Whalen, the supreme court held that to obtain a new long-term domestic violence protective order a person must allege a new violent incident that has not previously served as the basis for such a protective order, using incidents that served as the basis for a prior order would violate res judicata.  Sarah ...
  • State v. Doe In State v. Doe, the supreme court held individuals convicted out-of-state may only be required to register in Alaska as sex offenders if their conviction was under an out-of-state law “similar” to an Alaskan law.  Two cases consolidated on appeal presented similar facts.  In the first, John Doe I plead guilty to “communicating with a ...
  • Smith v. State In Smith v. State, the Alaska court of appeals held that to determine if two crimes constitute a single offense for double jeopardy purposes “a court must compare the different statutory provisions as applied to the facts of the case.” Smith, along with three other men broke into Benjamin Gall and Amanda Swafford’s apartment while ...
  • Kowalski v. State In Kowalski v. State, the court of appeals held that retroactive application of Alaska Evidence Rule 404(b)(4) did not violate the ex post facto clauses of the Alaska Constitution or the United States Constitution.  In 1996, investigators declined to charge Kowalski for the death of his girlfriend Perry, whom by his account he accidentally shot ...
  • Alvarez-Perdomo v. State In Alvarez-Perdomo v. State, the court of appeals held that defendants must clearly and unequivocally state their desire to testify before a judge directs them to take the stand.  Alvarez-Perdomo was convicted of first-degree assault for shooting his mother.  At trial, Alvarez-Perdomo’s attorney announced that he did not intend to present a defense case, which ...
  • State v. Baker In State v. Baker, the Court of Appeals held that criminal offenses arise out of the “same criminal episode” for purposes of calculating a defendant’s speedy trial rights only when there is a close elemental or evidentiary overlap between the charged offenses, or when the commission of one criminal offense has a causal connection to ...
  • McGuire v. State In Mcguire v. State, the Alaska Court of Appeals held that when an officer has probable cause to arrest an individual for a drug offense, and has reason to believe that the individual might have other evidence of that offense on his person, the officer is authorized to conduct a pat-down search. During a traffic ...
  • Silas v. State In Silas v. State the Alaska Court of Appeals held that an individual’s revocation of probation requires a finding of good cause. Roy Silas was convicted of second-degree sexual abuse of a minor and served a term of active imprisonment followed by 10 years of probation with a 5-year suspended term of imprisonment. A condition ...
  • Pfister v. State In Pfister v. State, the Alaska Court of Appeals held that a surviving felony accomplice may be prosecuted for manslaughter when a fellow accomplice is killed by the victim or responding police officers.  Brian Albert Pfister and two accomplices broke into the home of a marijuana grower and robbed him. Pfister waited outside while his ...
  • Pulusila v. State In Pulusila v. State, the Alaska Court of Appeals held that in interpreting a condition of probation, a court must consider (1) whether a particular interpretation would ensure public safety or foster the defendant’s rehabilitation, and (2) how a reasonable person in the defendant’s place would understand the probation condition. In September 2016, Pulusila was ...

Criminal Law

  • Whalen v. Whalen In Whalen v. Whalen, the supreme court held that to obtain a new long-term domestic violence protective order a person must allege a new violent incident that has not previously served as the basis for such a protective order, using incidents that served as the basis for a prior order would violate res judicata.  Sarah ...
  • State v. Doe In State v. Doe, the supreme court held individuals convicted out-of-state may only be required to register in Alaska as sex offenders if their conviction was under an out-of-state law “similar” to an Alaskan law.  Two cases consolidated on appeal presented similar facts.  In the first, John Doe I plead guilty to “communicating with a ...
  • Smith v. State In Smith v. State, the Alaska court of appeals held that to determine if two crimes constitute a single offense for double jeopardy purposes “a court must compare the different statutory provisions as applied to the facts of the case.” Smith, along with three other men broke into Benjamin Gall and Amanda Swafford’s apartment while ...
  • Kowalski v. State In Kowalski v. State, the court of appeals held that retroactive application of Alaska Evidence Rule 404(b)(4) did not violate the ex post facto clauses of the Alaska Constitution or the United States Constitution.  In 1996, investigators declined to charge Kowalski for the death of his girlfriend Perry, whom by his account he accidentally shot ...
  • Alvarez-Perdomo v. State In Alvarez-Perdomo v. State, the court of appeals held that defendants must clearly and unequivocally state their desire to testify before a judge directs them to take the stand.  Alvarez-Perdomo was convicted of first-degree assault for shooting his mother.  At trial, Alvarez-Perdomo’s attorney announced that he did not intend to present a defense case, which ...
  • State v. Baker In State v. Baker, the Court of Appeals held that criminal offenses arise out of the “same criminal episode” for purposes of calculating a defendant’s speedy trial rights only when there is a close elemental or evidentiary overlap between the charged offenses, or when the commission of one criminal offense has a causal connection to ...
  • McGuire v. State In Mcguire v. State, the Alaska Court of Appeals held that when an officer has probable cause to arrest an individual for a drug offense, and has reason to believe that the individual might have other evidence of that offense on his person, the officer is authorized to conduct a pat-down search. During a traffic ...
  • Silas v. State In Silas v. State the Alaska Court of Appeals held that an individual’s revocation of probation requires a finding of good cause. Roy Silas was convicted of second-degree sexual abuse of a minor and served a term of active imprisonment followed by 10 years of probation with a 5-year suspended term of imprisonment. A condition ...
  • Pfister v. State In Pfister v. State, the Alaska Court of Appeals held that a surviving felony accomplice may be prosecuted for manslaughter when a fellow accomplice is killed by the victim or responding police officers.  Brian Albert Pfister and two accomplices broke into the home of a marijuana grower and robbed him. Pfister waited outside while his ...
  • Pulusila v. State In Pulusila v. State, the Alaska Court of Appeals held that in interpreting a condition of probation, a court must consider (1) whether a particular interpretation would ensure public safety or foster the defendant’s rehabilitation, and (2) how a reasonable person in the defendant’s place would understand the probation condition. In September 2016, Pulusila was ...