Legal Opinion

State v. Semancik

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided October 1, 2004No. S-10846PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

FABE, Justice.

I. INTRODUCTION

This petition for hearing arises out of a conviction for attempted burglary. Seman-cik challenged the sufficiency of his attempted burglary indictment for the first time on appeal on the basis that it failed to specify what crime he intended to commit when he entered the dwelling. The court of appeals, bound by the rule in Adkins v. State, 1 reversed Semancik's conviction and dismissed the indictment. The State appeals, asking us to overrule Adkins to the extent that it (1) requires burglary indictments to specify the defendant's intended crime and (2)…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Russell v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  2. State v. FrazierOhio Supreme Court · 1995
  3. People v. . SullivanNew York Court of Appeals · 1903
  4. State v. BergeronWashington Supreme Court · 1985
  5. State v. WatersSupreme Court of Florida · 1983

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Doe v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 2008
  2. Iyapana v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2012
  3. State v. SmartAlaska Supreme Court · 2009
  4. State v. RansteadAlaska Supreme Court · 2018
  5. Garhart v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2006

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API