Alaska Stat. » Chapter 12.40
Alaska Statutes

Alaska Stat. § 12.40.110 (2026)

Hearsay evidence in prosecutions for sexual offenses

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AK-LEGakleg.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Sec. 12.40.110. Hearsay evidence in prosecutions for sexual offenses.

Chapter 45. Trial, Evidence, Compromise.
Article 1. Trial Jury.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1988–2021 · leading case: Gerald P. VanPatten v. State of Indiana, 986 N.E.2d 255 (Ind. 2013).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Gerald P. VanPatten v. State of Indiana, 986 N.E.2d 255 (Ind. 2013). · cites it 6× “To that end, thirty-two states, including Indiana, have child hearsay statutes that apply only in prosecutions for certain serious offenses and only to statements describing the charged offense that are not otherwise admissible.”
Murray v. State, 770 P.2d 1131 (Alaska Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 7× “Murray contends that pursuant to AS 12.40.110, the state was permitted to rely heavily on hearsay testimony before the grand jury to secure the indictment.”
Hamilton v. State, 771 P.2d 1358 (Alaska Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 4× “The legislature incorporated the requirements of reliability and corroboration into AS 12.40.110 which permits, under limited circumstances, the use of hearsay statements before the grand jury from child accusers in sexual abuse prosecutions.”
State v. Swan, 790 P.2d 610 (Wash. 1990). “20 Alaska Stat. § 12.40.110 . 21 Murray v. State, 770 P.”
Snowden v. State, 846 A.2d 36 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 2004). “Alaska Stat. § 12.40.110 (2003); Ark R. Evid.”
Stevens v. People, 796 P.2d 946 (Colo. 1990). · cites it 2× “, Alaska Stat. § 12.40.110 (Supp.1989); Ariz.”
Cassidy v. State, 536 A.2d 666 (Md. Ct. Spec. App. 1988). “37, § 704-6(4)(c) (SmithHurd 1985); Indiana: Ind.Code § 35-37-4-6 (1985); Iowa: Iowa Code Ann.”
Schmidt v. State, 401 P.3d 868 (Wyo. 2017). “, Alaska Stat. Ann. § 12.40.110 (West 2017) Hearsay evidence in prosecutions for sexual offenses', Cal.”
Petersen v. State, 838 P.2d 812 (Alaska Ct. App. 1992). “The superior court’s order denying the motion to dismiss this charge was based on the court’s conclusion that the video tape was sufficiently reliable and corroborated to warrant admission before the grand jury under AS 12.40.110(a): Hearsay evidence in prosecutions for sexual…”
State of Alaska v. Harry Norman Powell, 487 P.3d 609 (Alaska Ct. App. 2021). “41, § 1; see also AS 12.40.110. –4– 2698 age of sixteen are not hearsay and may be admitted if certain foundational requirements are met.”
— Alaska Stat. § 12.40.110(a) — 1 case
Petersen v. State, 838 P.2d 812 (Alaska Ct. App. 1992). “The superior court’s order denying the motion to dismiss this charge was based on the court’s conclusion that the video tape was sufficiently reliable and corroborated to warrant admission before the grand jury under AS 12.40.110(a): Hearsay evidence in prosecutions for sexual…”
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.