[TORT LAW] In Marshall v. Peter,[1] the supreme court held that reasonable jurors could disagree over whether the defendant was negligent in an automobile accident case.[2] Defendant Peter came to a complete stop behind the car of plaintiff Marshall at a red light, leaving about one-half car length between them.[3] When the light turned green Continue Reading »
[CRIMINAL LAW] In Young v. State,[1] the supreme court held that the Manson v. Brathwaite[2] test for evaluating eyewitness identifications failed to account for due process reliability concerns and thus devised a new test requiring evidence of a system variable of suggestiveness to justify a hearing, followed by a totality of circumstances analysis of system Continue Reading »
[CRIMINAL PROCEDURE] In Trout v. State,[1] the court of appeals held that a trial judge is not required to conduct an independent inquiry as to whether a defendant made a knowing and voluntary decision to take the stand at his/her trial.[2] In 2009, the three sons of Lisa Trout moved in with their father, Dunovan Continue Reading »
[CRIMINAL PROCEDURE] In Hinson v. State,[1] the court of appeals held that in a trial for failure to register as a sex offender charge, it is not plain error to tell the jury the charge involves registration as a sex offender.[2] While issuing a citation during a traffic stop, Alaska State Trooper Joel Miner asked Continue Reading »
[CONSTITUTIONAL LAW]# In Moore v. State,[1] the court of appeals held that reasonable suspicion does not allow police to keep a defendant’s luggage overnight and ship it elsewhere for further investigation.[2] Police seized Moore’s luggage at the Dillingham airport based on tips that he was carrying marijuana.[3] After a magistrate judge in Dillingham denied an Continue Reading »
[FAMILY LAW] In Lee-Magana v. Carpenter,[1] the supreme court held that prevailing petitioners, although not prevailing respondents, should generally be awarded attorneys’ fees in protective order proceedings.[2] Lee-Magana and Carpenter were in a romantic relationship for approximately two years and had a child together, but split amidst allegations of domestic violence.[3] Lee-Magana petitioned first for Continue Reading »
[HEALTH LAW] In the Matter of the Necessity for the Hospitalization of Mark V.,[1] the supreme court held that the petitioner bears the burden of proving, by clear and convincing evidence, that a respondent is gravely disabled and that commitment is the least restrictive alternative.[2] Anchorage police took Mark V. into custody and transported him Continue Reading »
[ADMINISTRATIVE LAW] In Huit v. Ashwater Burns, Inc.,[1] the supreme court held when a superior court remands a case to an administrative agency decisions are not final if they contemplate further proceedings,[2] and the Alaska’s worker compensation statute requires employers to provide substantial evidence an employees’ injuries are not work-related to rebut the presumption the Continue Reading »
[CRIMINAL PROCEDURE] In Isadore v. State,[1] the court of appeals held that a defendant may not file an appeal of a bail order if the defendant does not remain in custody.[2] Isadore filed an appeal of his bail amount arguing that it was excessive.[3] However, this request was mischaracterized because bail orders are interlocutory orders, Continue Reading »
[CIVIL PROCEDURE] In Jerry B. v. Sally B.,[1] the supreme court held that, where a criminal conviction has been entered into evidence in a civil suit, the convicted party may be collaterally estopped from relitigating issues decided in the criminal case.[2] A husband was arrested following allegations that he had sexually abused his daughter.[3] His Continue Reading »
