Alaska Statutes
Alaska Stat. § 11.71.080 (2026)
Aggregate weight of live marijuana plants
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
AK-LEGakleg.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 11.71.080. Aggregate weight of live marijuana plants.
For purposes of calculating the aggregate weight of a live marijuana plant, the aggregate weight shall be one-sixth of the measured weight of the marijuana plant after the roots of the marijuana plant have been removed.
For purposes of calculating the aggregate weight of a live marijuana plant, the aggregate weight shall be one-sixth of the measured weight of the marijuana plant after the roots of the marijuana plant have been removed.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9
cases, 1986–2018 · leading case: Jordan v. State, 420 P.3d 1143 (Alaska 2018).
Jordan v. State, 420 P.3d 1143 (Alaska 2018). “The superior court denied the motion, reasoning that the "one sixth" method described in AS 11.71.080 is not exclusive and that the police had used a reasonable alternative.”
Maness v. State, 49 P.3d 1128 (Alaska Ct. App. 2002). “040(a)(3)(F), AS 11.71.080, and AS 11.71.900(14). The first, AS 11.”
Gibson v. State, 719 P.2d 687 (Alaska Ct. App. 1986). “Gibson contends that in order to be convicted of either MICS offense, he must have delivered the specified amount of marijuana, excluding the weight of any stalks, fiber or sterilized seeds.”
Noy v. State, 83 P.3d 538 (Alaska Ct. App. 2003). “1986)) (the “commonly used form” language of AS 11.71.080 "refers to the method of calculating the aggregate weight of live marijuana plants”).”
Atkinson v. State, 869 P.2d 486 (Alaska Ct. App. 1994). “1986), however, we made it clear that this statutory definition is not controlling when the aggregate weight of marijuana is at issue in a given case; rather, the issue is governed by AS 11.71.080, which provides: For purposes of calculating the aggregate weight of a live…”
Hoekzema v. State, 193 P.3d 765 (Alaska Ct. App. 2008). “In Knight, the defendant was convicted of violating AS 11.71.080(a)(1), the statute proscribing the possession of any amount of cocaine for purposes of delivery.”
Hotrum v. State, 130 P.3d 965 (Alaska Ct. App. 2006). “]”); AS 11.71.080 ("[f]or purposes of calculating the aggregate weight of a live marijuana plant, the aggregate weight shall be the weight of the marijuana when reduced to its commonly used form.”
Pease v. State, 27 P.3d 788 (Alaska Ct. App. 2001). “] | Moreover, a companion statute, AS 11.71.080, declares that [flor purposes of calculating the aggregate weight of a live marifuana plant, the aggregate weight shall be the weight of the marijuana when reduced to its commonly used form.”
Rofkar v. State, 305 P.3d 356 (Alaska Ct. App. 2013). “This Court's treatment of Davis's double jeopardy argument consisted of one concluso-ry paragraph: Davis next contends that the double jeopardy clause of the Alaska Constitution prohibits separate convictions and sentences for possession of cocaine with intent to deliver, AS…”
— Alaska Stat. § 11.71.080(a)(1) — 2 cases
Hoekzema v. State, 193 P.3d 765 (Alaska Ct. App. 2008). “In Knight, the defendant was convicted of violating AS 11.71.080(a)(1), the statute proscribing the possession of any amount of cocaine for purposes of delivery.”
Rofkar v. State, 305 P.3d 356 (Alaska Ct. App. 2013). “This Court's treatment of Davis's double jeopardy argument consisted of one concluso-ry paragraph: Davis next contends that the double jeopardy clause of the Alaska Constitution prohibits separate convictions and sentences for possession of cocaine with intent to deliver, AS…”
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.