Alaska Statutes
Alaska Stat. § 11.46.210 (2026)
Theft by failure to make required disposition of funds received or held
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
AK-LEGakleg.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 11.46.210. Theft by failure to make required disposition of funds received or held.
(a) A person commits theft by failure to make required disposition of funds received or held if the person
(1) obtains property from anyone or personal services from an employee upon an agreement or subject to a known legal obligation to make specified payment or other disposition to a third person, whether from that property or its proceeds or from the person's own property to be reserved in equivalent amount; and
(2) exercises control over the property or services as the person's own and fails to make the required payment or disposition.
(b) It is not a defense to a prosecution based on theft by failure to make required disposition of funds received or held that it may be impossible to identify particular property as belonging to the victim at the time of the defendant's failure to make the required payment or disposition.
(c) In a prosecution based on theft by failure to make required disposition of funds received or held, the fact that the defendant was a fiduciary or an officer or employee of a government or a financial institution is prima facie evidence
(1) that the defendant exercised control over property or services as the defendant's own if the defendant failed to pay or account upon lawful demand or if an audit reveals a shortage or falsification of accounts; and
(2) that the defendant knew any legal obligation relevant under (a)(1) of this section.
(a) A person commits theft by failure to make required disposition of funds received or held if the person
(1) obtains property from anyone or personal services from an employee upon an agreement or subject to a known legal obligation to make specified payment or other disposition to a third person, whether from that property or its proceeds or from the person's own property to be reserved in equivalent amount; and
(2) exercises control over the property or services as the person's own and fails to make the required payment or disposition.
(b) It is not a defense to a prosecution based on theft by failure to make required disposition of funds received or held that it may be impossible to identify particular property as belonging to the victim at the time of the defendant's failure to make the required payment or disposition.
(c) In a prosecution based on theft by failure to make required disposition of funds received or held, the fact that the defendant was a fiduciary or an officer or employee of a government or a financial institution is prima facie evidence
(1) that the defendant exercised control over property or services as the defendant's own if the defendant failed to pay or account upon lawful demand or if an audit reveals a shortage or falsification of accounts; and
(2) that the defendant knew any legal obligation relevant under (a)(1) of this section.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1993–2021 · leading case: State v. Saathoff, 29 P.3d 236 (Alaska 2001).
State v. Saathoff, 29 P.3d 236 (Alaska 2001). “200; (6) the person commits theft by failure to make required disposition of funds received or held under AS 11.46.210. 16 . AS 12.10.010 provides in part: Except as otherwise provided by law, a person may not be prosecuted, tried, or punished for an offense other than murder…”
Cheely v. State, 850 P.2d 653 (Alaska Ct. App. 1993). “200; (6) the person commits theft by failure to make required disposition of funds received or held under AS 11.46.210. Cheely first argues that, because his indictment lists the charging statute as “AS 11.”
Saathoff v. State, 991 P.2d 1280 (Alaska Ct. App. 1999). “200; [or] (6) the person commits theft by failure to make required disposition of funds received or held under AS 11.46.210. At first blush, AS 11.46.100 may appear to define six different ways of committing theft (including “theft by receiving as defined in AS 11.”
White Env't Consultants, Inc. v. Skupa (Bankr. D. Alaska 2021). “200; or (6) the person commits theft by failure to make required disposition of funds received or held under AS 11.46.210. 1 Although the Justice for Fraud Victims report totaled only $87,065.”
Mun. of Anchorage v. Sanders, 902 P.2d 347 (Alaska Ct. App. 1995). “See AS 11.46.210(b) (theft by failure to make required disposition of funds); AS 11.”
— Alaska Stat. § 11.46.210(b) — 1 case
Mun. of Anchorage v. Sanders, 902 P.2d 347 (Alaska Ct. App. 1995). “See AS 11.46.210(b) (theft by failure to make required disposition of funds); AS 11.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.