accused in preparing defense (Alaska) · Go Syfert
← Alaska issues

accused in preparing defense in Alaska

5 Alaska opinions name it 2 courts 1970–1982 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 (3)

CaseFollowedCited
The People v. Solomongreen
ill · 1962 · cited in 4 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 1970–1982
2 sentences

1973Before a judgment of conviction will be reversed because of the denial of such a motion, it must appear that the refusal of additional time in some manner embarrassed the accused in preparing his defense and prejudiced his rights.” 182 N.E.2d at 738 . [Citations omitted, emphasis added.] In Doe we said: “Although in the case at bar, unlike the case of Klockenbrink v. State, supra, no particular instance of prejudice was shown to have resulted from the shortness of time between charge and trial, we believe the added circumstance in ' this case that appellant’s counsel had the other case to prep

1970Before a judgment of conviction will be reversed because of the denial of such a motion, it must appear that the refusal of additional time in some manner embarrassed the accused in preparing his defense and prejudiced his rights.” 182 N.E.2d at 738 (citations omitted).

34
Klockenbrink v. Stategreen
alaska · 1970 · cited in 2 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 1981–1982
2 sentences

1982Klockenbrink v. State, 472 P.2d 958, 964 (Alaska 1970), quoting People v. Solomon, 24 Ill.2d 586 , 182 N.E.2d 736, 738 (1962).

1982Klockenbrink v. State, 472 P.2d 958, 964 (Alaska 1970), quoting People v. Solomon, 24 Ill.2d 586 , 182 N.E.2d 736, 738 (1962).

22
Doe v. Stategreen
alaska · 1971 · cited in 2 Alaska opinions naming this issue, 1973–1976
2 sentences

1976Before a judgment of conviction will be reversed because of the denial of such a motion, it must appear that the refusal of additional time in some manner embarrassed the accused in preparing his defense and prejudiced his rights. 9 In this regard we held in Doe v. State, 487 P.2d 47, 57 (Alaska 1971), that the prejudice could be presumed in certain cases.

1973Before a judgment of conviction will be reversed because of the denial of such a motion, it must appear that the refusal of additional time in some manner embarrassed the accused in preparing his defense and prejudiced his rights.” 182 N.E.2d at 738 . [Citations omitted, emphasis added.] In Doe we said: “Although in the case at bar, unlike the case of Klockenbrink v. State, supra, no particular instance of prejudice was shown to have resulted from the shortness of time between charge and trial, we believe the added circumstance in ' this case that appellant’s counsel had the other case to prep

12

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Where else courts name it

OH 36 (1992–2020) IL 24 (1915–2020) CA 19 (1945–2023) VA 9 (1989–2023) AK 5 (1970–1982) WA 2 (1978–2018) MD 2 (1974–2001) ID 2 (1957–1965)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check