Mallott rule (Alaska) · Go Syfert
← Alaska issues

Mallott rule in Alaska

7 Alaska opinions name it 2 courts 1980–2008 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Alaska courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (8)

CaseFollowedCited
Cheely v. Stategreen
alaskactapp · 1993 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
2 sentences

2008Of the other fifteen jurors who sat on Harmon's case, four had absolutely no prior knowledge of the case, 20 and the other eleven knew only minimal facts about the case. 21 *1198 As this Court explained in Cheely v. State, 861 P.2d 1168, 1175 (Alaska App.19983), even when a criminal case has received intensive pre-trial publicity, "the question [under the Mallott test] is not how many biased prospective jurors were identified and exeused".

2008Of the other fifteen jurors who sat on Harmon's case, four had absolutely no prior knowledge of the case, 20 and the other eleven knew only minimal facts about the case. 21 *1198 As this Court explained in Cheely v. State, 861 P.2d 1168, 1175 (Alaska App.19983), even when a criminal case has received intensive pre-trial publicity, "the question [under the Mallott test] is not how many biased prospective jurors were identified and exeused".

11
Newcomb v. Stategreen
alaskactapp · 1990 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 1993–1993
2 sentences

1993Compare Newcomb v. State, 800 P.2d 935, 938 (Alaska App.1990).

1993Compare Newcomb v. State, 800 P.2d 935, 938 (Alaska App.1990).

11
Johnson v. City of Mount Vernongreen
washctapp · 1984 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 1985–1985
2 sentences

1985REMEDY The court of appeals, in Harris, 679 P.2d at 405, concluded that the determination of the appropriate “sanction” for a violation of the Mallott rule is best left to the sound discretion of the trial court, under the standards set forth in Putnam v. State, 629 P.2d 35, 43-44 (Alaska 1980). 24 We, however, reject this choice of remedy.

1985REMEDY The court of appeals, in Harris, 679 P.2d at 405, concluded that the determination of the appropriate “sanction” for a violation of the Mallott rule is best left to the sound discretion of the trial court, under the standards set forth in Putnam v. State, 629 P.2d 35, 43-44 (Alaska 1980). 24 We, however, reject this choice of remedy.

11
Putnam v. Stategreen
alaska · 1980 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 1985–1985
2 sentences

1985REMEDY The court of appeals, in Harris, 679 P.2d at 405, concluded that the determination of the appropriate “sanction” for a violation of the Mallott rule is best left to the sound discretion of the trial court, under the standards set forth in Putnam v. State, 629 P.2d 35, 43-44 (Alaska 1980). 24 We, however, reject this choice of remedy.

1985REMEDY The court of appeals, in Harris, 679 P.2d at 405, concluded that the determination of the appropriate “sanction” for a violation of the Mallott rule is best left to the sound discretion of the trial court, under the standards set forth in Putnam v. State, 629 P.2d 35, 43-44 (Alaska 1980). 24 We, however, reject this choice of remedy.

11
People v. Rincon-Pinedagreen
cal · 1975 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 1984–1984
2 sentences

1984People v. Rincon-Pineda, 14 Cal.3d 864 , 123 Cal. Rptr. 119 , 538 P.2d 247, 252-53 (1975); Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court, 57 Cal.2d 450 , 20 Cal. Rptr. 321 , 369 P.2d 937, 939-40 (1962) (lower court exceeds its jurisdiction when it refuses to follow decision of higher court on ground that the decision is erroneous).

1984People v. Rincon-Pineda, 14 Cal.3d 864 , 123 Cal. Rptr. 119 , 538 P.2d 247, 252-53 (1975); Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court, 57 Cal.2d 450 , 20 Cal. Rptr. 321 , 369 P.2d 937, 939-40 (1962) (lower court exceeds its jurisdiction when it refuses to follow decision of higher court on ground that the decision is erroneous).

11
Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Courtgreen
cal · 1962 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 1984–1984
2 sentences

1984People v. Rincon-Pineda, 14 Cal.3d 864 , 123 Cal. Rptr. 119 , 538 P.2d 247, 252-53 (1975); Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court, 57 Cal.2d 450 , 20 Cal. Rptr. 321 , 369 P.2d 937, 939-40 (1962) (lower court exceeds its jurisdiction when it refuses to follow decision of higher court on ground that the decision is erroneous).

1984People v. Rincon-Pineda, 14 Cal.3d 864 , 123 Cal. Rptr. 119 , 538 P.2d 247, 252-53 (1975); Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court, 57 Cal.2d 450 , 20 Cal. Rptr. 321 , 369 P.2d 937, 939-40 (1962) (lower court exceeds its jurisdiction when it refuses to follow decision of higher court on ground that the decision is erroneous).

11
United States v. Johnsonred
scotus · 1982 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 1984–1984
2 sentences

1984See United States v. Johnson, 457 U.S. 537 , 102 S.Ct. 2579 , 73 L.Ed.2d 202 (1982); State v. Glass, 596 P.2d 10 (Alaska 1979).

1984See United States v. Johnson, 457 U.S. 537 , 102 S.Ct. 2579 , 73 L.Ed.2d 202 (1982); State v. Glass, 596 P.2d 10 (Alaska 1979).

11
United States v. Y. Hata & Company, Limited, a Corporation, United States of America v. Minoru Hatagreen
ca9 · 1976 · cited in 1 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 1980–1980
1 sentence

1980Hata and Co., Ltd., 535 F.2d 508, 512 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 828 , 97 S.Ct. 87 , 50 L.Ed.2d 92 (1976), we affirm the trial court's denial of Mallott's motion to dismiss the indictment.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Alaska. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (11)

CaseCitedYears
Stephan v. State green
alaska · 1985
2 sentences

1996In Stephan we observed: Since its announcement, the Mallott rule [requiring recording of interrogations] has always included a proviso, "when feasible." The failure to electronically record an entire custodial interrogation will, therefore, be considered a violation of the rule, and subject to exclusion, only if the failure is unexcused. 711 P.2d at 1162 .

1996In Stephan we observed: Since its announcement, the Mallott rule [requiring recording of interrogations] has always included a proviso, "when feasible." The failure to electronically record an entire custodial interrogation will, therefore, be considered a violation of the rule, and subject to exclusion, only if the failure is unexcused. 711 P.2d at 1162 .

11996–1996
Mallott v. State green
alaska · 1980
1 sentence

1993Jerrel can prevail on her change of venue claim only if her case is governed by the more relaxed Mallott standard for cases in which intensive pretrial publicity results in disqualification of a “substantial number of venirepersons.” Mallott v. State, 608 P.2d at 748 .

11993–1993
SB v. State green
alaska · 1980
2 sentences

1985This requirement (hereinafter the Mallott rule) was again noted in S.B. v. State, 614 P.2d 786 (Alaska 1980), with the observation that an electronic record of such interviews “will be a great aid” when courts are called upon to determine “the circumstances of a confession or other waiver of [a suspect’s] Miranda rights.” Id. at 790 n.9.

1985This requirement (hereinafter the Mallott rule) was again noted in S.B. v. State, 614 P.2d 786 (Alaska 1980), with the observation that an electronic record of such interviews “will be a great aid” when courts are called upon to determine “the circumstances of a confession or other waiver of [a suspect’s] Miranda rights.” Id. at 790 n.9.

11985–1985
McMahan v. State green
alaska · 1980
2 sentences

1985In a third case, McMahan v. State, 617 P.2d 494 (Alaska 1980), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 839 , *1158 102 S.Ct. 146 , 70 L.Ed.2d 121 (1981), the recording requirement was repeated, with the further statement that “if Miranda rights are read to the defendant, this too should be recorded.” 617 P.2d at 499 n.11.

1985In a third case, McMahan v. State, 617 P.2d 494 (Alaska 1980), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 839 , *1158 102 S.Ct. 146 , 70 L.Ed.2d 121 (1981), the recording requirement was repeated, with the further statement that “if Miranda rights are read to the defendant, this too should be recorded.” 617 P.2d at 499 n.11.

11985–1985
Bone v. Illinois green
scotus · 1981
2 sentences

1985In a third case, McMahan v. State, 617 P.2d 494 (Alaska 1980), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 839 , *1158 102 S.Ct. 146 , 70 L.Ed.2d 121 (1981), the recording requirement was repeated, with the further statement that “if Miranda rights are read to the defendant, this too should be recorded.” 617 P.2d at 499 n.11.

1985In a third case, McMahan v. State, 617 P.2d 494 (Alaska 1980), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 839 , *1158 102 S.Ct. 146 , 70 L.Ed.2d 121 (1981), the recording requirement was repeated, with the further statement that “if Miranda rights are read to the defendant, this too should be recorded.” 617 P.2d at 499 n.11.

11985–1985
Stevens v. Kirkpatrick green
scotus · 1981
2 sentences

1985In a third case, McMahan v. State, 617 P.2d 494 (Alaska 1980), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 839 , *1158 102 S.Ct. 146 , 70 L.Ed.2d 121 (1981), the recording requirement was repeated, with the further statement that “if Miranda rights are read to the defendant, this too should be recorded.” 617 P.2d at 499 n.11.

1985In a third case, McMahan v. State, 617 P.2d 494 (Alaska 1980), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 839 , *1158 102 S.Ct. 146 , 70 L.Ed.2d 121 (1981), the recording requirement was repeated, with the further statement that “if Miranda rights are read to the defendant, this too should be recorded.” 617 P.2d at 499 n.11.

11985–1985
Osteen v. So. Car. Cotton Oil Co. green
sc · 1915
2 sentences

1985In a third case, McMahan v. State, 617 P.2d 494 (Alaska 1980), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 839 , *1158 102 S.Ct. 146 , 70 L.Ed.2d 121 (1981), the recording requirement was repeated, with the further statement that “if Miranda rights are read to the defendant, this too should be recorded.” 617 P.2d at 499 n.11.

1985In a third case, McMahan v. State, 617 P.2d 494 (Alaska 1980), cert. denied, 454 U.S. 839 , *1158 102 S.Ct. 146 , 70 L.Ed.2d 121 (1981), the recording requirement was repeated, with the further statement that “if Miranda rights are read to the defendant, this too should be recorded.” 617 P.2d at 499 n.11.

11985–1985
State v. Glass green
alaska · 1979
2 sentences

1984See United States v. Johnson, 457 U.S. 537 , 102 S.Ct. 2579 , 73 L.Ed.2d 202 (1982); State v. Glass, 596 P.2d 10 (Alaska 1979).

1984See United States v. Johnson, 457 U.S. 537 , 102 S.Ct. 2579 , 73 L.Ed.2d 202 (1982); State v. Glass, 596 P.2d 10 (Alaska 1979).

11984–1984
Civic Awareness of America, Ltd. v. Mathews green
scotus · 1976
1 sentence

1980Hata and Co., Ltd., 535 F.2d 508, 512 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 828 , 97 S.Ct. 87 , 50 L.Ed.2d 92 (1976), we affirm the trial court's denial of Mallott's motion to dismiss the indictment.

11980–1980
Riebschlaeger v. United States green
scotus · 1976
1 sentence

1980Hata and Co., Ltd., 535 F.2d 508, 512 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 429 U.S. 828 , 97 S.Ct. 87 , 50 L.Ed.2d 92 (1976), we affirm the trial court's denial of Mallott's motion to dismiss the indictment.

11980–1980
People v. Wheeler green
cal · 1978
2 sentences

1980In a supplemental brief, ordered by this court, Mallott has urged that we adopt the holding of the California Supreme Court in the case of People v. Wheeler, 22 Cal.3d 258 , 148 Cal. Rptr. 890 , 583 P.2d 748 (1978) and apply it here.

1980In a supplemental brief, ordered by this court, Mallott has urged that we adopt the holding of the California Supreme Court in the case of People v. Wheeler, 22 Cal.3d 258 , 148 Cal. Rptr. 890 , 583 P.2d 748 (1978) and apply it here.

11980–1980

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check