In Mcguire v. State,[1] 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 Continue Reading »
In Silas v. State[1] 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 Continue Reading »
In Pfister v. State,[1] 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 Continue Reading »
In Pulusila v. State,[1] 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 Continue Reading »
In Public Safety Employees Association, AFSCME Local 803, AFL-CIO v. City of Fairbanks,[1] the supreme court held that a city council’s politically motivated rejection of a collective bargaining agreement is not a violation of Alaska’s Public Employer Relations Act (the Act). In 2013, the City of Fairbanks began negotiating a new collective bargaining agreement with Continue Reading »
In Cottini v. Berggren,[1] the supreme court held that former agents may be entitled to attorney’s fees for defending against their former principal’s challenge to the agent’s accounting of costs of their former guardianship-relationship. Cottini acted as Berggren’s guardian after Berggren suffered a traumatic brain injury. After Berggren recovered, Berggren objected to Cottini’s accounting of Continue Reading »
In Solomon v. Solomon[1], the Supreme Court of Alaska held that a trial court must make sufficient factual findings to allow review of its legal conclusion an individual has a history of domestic violence. Terrace and Wendy Solomon married in 1999 and had four children; the two separated in 2014, and in January 2015 Wendy Continue Reading »
In Kailyn S. v Alaska Department of Health and Social Services,[1] the supreme court held that it is not an abuse of discretion to deny a motion for a continuance in a termination of parental rights hearing when the motion is only supported by a speculative assertion that it is necessary. Kailyn, a mother, filed for Continue Reading »
In Maxwell v. Sosnowski,[1] the supreme court held that a court may only award credit for post-separation mortgage payments for those payments made after the date of separation. Jill Maxwell and William Sosnowski permanently separated on May 31, 2013, and were later divorced. During their marriage, they had purchased a triplex in Anchorage together. Sosnowski Continue Reading »
In Dean S. v. State, Department of Health & Social Services,[1] the supreme court held that a superior court’s procedurally proper denial of a motion to withdraw consent to adoption will not be overturned absent clear error established by a “definite impression” of factual error in the record. Dean and Emily S. were investigated by Continue Reading »
