FAMILY LAW Natalie Howard In re Tiffany O. In In re Tiffany O., 467 P.3d 1076 (Alaska 2020), the supreme court held that removing a guardian who relied on prayer instead of other reasonable forms of health care did not violate the Alaska Constitution’s free exercise clause due to the state’s compelling interest in Continue Reading »
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Daisy Gray Hayes v. State In Hayes v. State, 474 P.3d 1179 (Alaska Ct. App. 2020), the court of appeals held that the hearsay exception for a child crime victim’s recorded statement in Alaska Evidence Rule 801(d)(3) covers statements where the victim is under sixteen years old at the time of the Continue Reading »
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW Macklin Willigan Forrer v. State In Forrer v. State, 471 P.3d 569 (Alaska 2020), the supreme court held that a debt-creating statute was unconstitutional because (1) subject-to-appropriations bonds are “debt” for purposes of Article IX, section 8 of the Alaska Constitution—and thus require Alaska voters’ authorization—and (2) the legislative scheme authorizing the Continue Reading »
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW Jacob Keohane Dalton v. State In Dalton v. State, 477 P.3d 650 (Alaska App. Ct. 2020), the court of appeals held that prohibiting a paroled felon from accessing the internet without his probation officer’s permission is an undue restriction on liberty. (Id. at 656). In 2017, Kevin Dalton sexually assaulted his sleeping Continue Reading »
CRIMINAL JUSTICE Kristen M. Renberg, PhD Chinuhuk v. State In Chinuhuk v. State, 472 P.3d 511 (Alaska 2020), the supreme court held that trial courts do not have the discretion to reduce probation if an offender was previously sentenced to the statutory minimum period of probation because the legislature intended for a sex offender’s Continue Reading »
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Kate Goldberg Chilcote v. State In Chilcote v. State, 471 P.3d 599 (Alaska Ct. App. 2020), the court of appeals held that neither Virginia’s two-tiered adjudicated system, nor the failure to advise a defendant of their right to a jury trial, violates a defendant’s fundamental rights in terms negating a “prior conviction” Continue Reading »
COMMERCIAL LAW Melissa English Beardsley v. Robert N. Jacobsen & Darlene F. Jacobsen Living Trust In Beardsley v. Robert N. Jacobsen & Darlene F. Jacobsen Living Trust, 472 P.3d 500 (Alaska 2020), the supreme court held that a genuine dispute existed over whether a purchaser personally guaranteed the obligations of a bankrupt entity because Continue Reading »
CRIMINAL JUSTICE Mike Keramidas Akelkok v. State In Akelkok v. State, 475 P.3d 1136 (Alaska Ct. App. 2020), the court of appeals held that the trial court did not violate Charles Akelkok’s due process rights through its efforts to have Annie Sergie testify. (Id. at 1142). Akelkok was convicted of third-degree assault for attacking Continue Reading »
CRIMINAL JUSTICE Mike Keramidas Ahvakana v. State In Ahvakana v. State, 475 P.3d 1118 (Alaska Ct. App. 2020), the court of appeals held that Ahvakana’s attorney provided him incompetent advice and remanded the case to determine if the advice prejudiced Ahvakana. (Id at 1124, 1126). Ahvakana was indicted with, inter alia, first-degree assault and Continue Reading »
ADMINISTRATIVE LAW Mike Keramidas West v. Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority In West v. Alaska Mental Health Tr. Auth., 467 P.3d 1064 (Alaska 2020), the supreme court held that the Land Office of the Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority acted in the Trust’s best interest when it sold five lots of land. (Id. at Continue Reading »
