Year In Review

Fletcher v. Fletcher

Posted on April 3rd, 2019

In Fletcher v. Fletcher,[1] the supreme court held that the trial court’s findings regarding the division of marital property should have been sufficient to overcome the presumption of an equal distribution of the property, and therefore the equal division was an abuse of the lower court’s discretion.  Married since 1990, Linda Fletcher filed for divorce Continue Reading »

Moody v. Lodge

Posted on April 3rd, 2019

In Moody v. Lodge,[1] the Alaska Supreme Court held that whether time not spent actively performing duties should be counted towards overtime under the Alaska Wage and Hour Act (AWHA) is determined by applying the standard of Hutka v. Sisters of Providence in Washington.  From 2002 to 2007, Jeff Moody worked as a pilot for Royal Continue Reading »

Lambert v. State

Posted on March 20th, 2019

In Lambert v. State[1] the court of appeals held that the Osborn standard does not apply to applications for post-conviction DNA testing under section 12.73 of the Alaska Statutes.  In 1982, Ann Benolken and her husband were raped and killed in a double-homicide committed by two individuals.  Lambert was convicted of the murder of Ann Continue Reading »

Cardenas v. State

Posted on March 20th, 2019

In Cardenas v. State,[1] the court of appeals held that the single-purpose container exception to the Fourth Amendment does not apply to gun cases if the incriminating nature of their contents is not immediately apparent.  Jesus Cardenas was pulled over for reckless driving and, in the course of that traffic stop, informed the officer that Continue Reading »

Hamburg v. State

Posted on March 20th, 2019

In Hamburg v. State,[1] the Court of Appeals held that the pre-2018 version of the Alaska bail statute, formerly section 12.30.011 of the Alaska Statutes, violated the constitutional provision requiring reasonable conditions of bail release be set for a defendant who has not yet been convicted.  Hamburg was charged with manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide Continue Reading »

Marcy v. Matanuska-Susitna Borough

Posted on March 20th, 2019

In Marcy v. Matanuska-Susitna Borough,[1] the supreme court held that the public interest in reviewing a suit similar to other potential upcoming litigation did not override the claim’s mootness.  In 2014, Alaska passed a statewide ballot initiative to legalize marijuana, enacting section 17.38 of the Alaska Statutes.  It legalized marijuana, but allows local governments to Continue Reading »

Levi v. Department of Labor and Workforce Development

Posted on March 20th, 2019

In Levi v. Department of Labor and Workforce Development,[1] the Supreme Court of Alaska held that it is fraudulent for an individual to knowingly fail to report earnings over 50 dollars per week when collecting unemployment insurance benefits under section 23.20.360 of the Alaska Statutes.  Levi received unemployment insurance benefits intermittently between 2010 and 2014. Continue Reading »

State v. Groppel

Posted on March 20th, 2019

In State v. Groppel,[1] the Supreme Court of Alaska held that experts appointed under section 12.47.070 of the Alaska Statutes are the court’s experts, that the superior court must appoint qualified experts from the Alaska Psychiatric Institute (API) unless there is a legitimate reason not to, and that if it appoints non-API experts, the court Continue Reading »

Michael W. v. Brown

Posted on March 20th, 2019

In Michael W. v. Brown,[1] the supreme court held that that while section 13.26.132 of the Alaska statutes allows for parental rights to be “suspended by circumstances,” that phrase focuses on parents’ ability to assume the responsibilities of parenthood, that custody will be harmful to a child’s welfare for other reasons is not alone enough Continue Reading »

Graham v. Durr

Posted on March 20th, 2019

In Graham v. Durr,[1] the Alaska Supreme Court held that a defendant may, in a civil proceeding, assert his right to self-incrimination while the defendant’s direct appeal of his sentence is pending.  In August 2013, Stacey Graham struck and killed two pedestrians while driving under the influence.  In May 2014, the victims’ families filed suit against Continue Reading »

Year In Review

Fletcher v. Fletcher

Posted on April 3rd, 2019

In Fletcher v. Fletcher,[1] the supreme court held that the trial court’s findings regarding the division of marital property should have been sufficient to overcome the presumption of an equal distribution of the property, and therefore the equal division was an abuse of the lower court’s discretion.  Married since 1990, Linda Fletcher filed for divorce Continue Reading »

Moody v. Lodge

Posted on April 3rd, 2019

In Moody v. Lodge,[1] the Alaska Supreme Court held that whether time not spent actively performing duties should be counted towards overtime under the Alaska Wage and Hour Act (AWHA) is determined by applying the standard of Hutka v. Sisters of Providence in Washington.  From 2002 to 2007, Jeff Moody worked as a pilot for Royal Continue Reading »

Lambert v. State

Posted on March 20th, 2019

In Lambert v. State[1] the court of appeals held that the Osborn standard does not apply to applications for post-conviction DNA testing under section 12.73 of the Alaska Statutes.  In 1982, Ann Benolken and her husband were raped and killed in a double-homicide committed by two individuals.  Lambert was convicted of the murder of Ann Continue Reading »

Cardenas v. State

Posted on March 20th, 2019

In Cardenas v. State,[1] the court of appeals held that the single-purpose container exception to the Fourth Amendment does not apply to gun cases if the incriminating nature of their contents is not immediately apparent.  Jesus Cardenas was pulled over for reckless driving and, in the course of that traffic stop, informed the officer that Continue Reading »

Hamburg v. State

Posted on March 20th, 2019

In Hamburg v. State,[1] the Court of Appeals held that the pre-2018 version of the Alaska bail statute, formerly section 12.30.011 of the Alaska Statutes, violated the constitutional provision requiring reasonable conditions of bail release be set for a defendant who has not yet been convicted.  Hamburg was charged with manslaughter and criminally negligent homicide Continue Reading »

Marcy v. Matanuska-Susitna Borough

Posted on March 20th, 2019

In Marcy v. Matanuska-Susitna Borough,[1] the supreme court held that the public interest in reviewing a suit similar to other potential upcoming litigation did not override the claim’s mootness.  In 2014, Alaska passed a statewide ballot initiative to legalize marijuana, enacting section 17.38 of the Alaska Statutes.  It legalized marijuana, but allows local governments to Continue Reading »

Levi v. Department of Labor and Workforce Development

Posted on March 20th, 2019

In Levi v. Department of Labor and Workforce Development,[1] the Supreme Court of Alaska held that it is fraudulent for an individual to knowingly fail to report earnings over 50 dollars per week when collecting unemployment insurance benefits under section 23.20.360 of the Alaska Statutes.  Levi received unemployment insurance benefits intermittently between 2010 and 2014. Continue Reading »

State v. Groppel

Posted on March 20th, 2019

In State v. Groppel,[1] the Supreme Court of Alaska held that experts appointed under section 12.47.070 of the Alaska Statutes are the court’s experts, that the superior court must appoint qualified experts from the Alaska Psychiatric Institute (API) unless there is a legitimate reason not to, and that if it appoints non-API experts, the court Continue Reading »

Michael W. v. Brown

Posted on March 20th, 2019

In Michael W. v. Brown,[1] the supreme court held that that while section 13.26.132 of the Alaska statutes allows for parental rights to be “suspended by circumstances,” that phrase focuses on parents’ ability to assume the responsibilities of parenthood, that custody will be harmful to a child’s welfare for other reasons is not alone enough Continue Reading »

Graham v. Durr

Posted on March 20th, 2019

In Graham v. Durr,[1] the Alaska Supreme Court held that a defendant may, in a civil proceeding, assert his right to self-incrimination while the defendant’s direct appeal of his sentence is pending.  In August 2013, Stacey Graham struck and killed two pedestrians while driving under the influence.  In May 2014, the victims’ families filed suit against Continue Reading »