Legal Opinion · Dissent

Kinegak v. State, Department of Corrections

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided February 17, 2006No. S-11315Published

1DissentFabe, Justice

I respectfully dissent because I do not believe that the court’s decision to overturn Zerbe v. State1 complies with our rule of stare decisis. Under this well-settled rule, we must adhere to our precedents unless clearly convinced (1) that a decision was originally erroneous or is no longer sound, and (2) that more good than harm would result from overruling it.2 Neither federal case law nor the legislative history of AS 09.50.250 indicates that Zerbe is no longer sound. Furthermore, overruling this decision is likely to result in significantly more harm than good, because doing so removes an…

2Cases cited28 opinions

  1. United States v. ShearerSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  2. Sheridan v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  3. State v. CoonAlaska Supreme Court · 1999
  4. Barry J. Quinones v. United States of America, and United States Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs and Its Agents and EmployeesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1974
  5. Ronald Gibson v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1972

23 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