Valentine v. State
Court of Appeals of Alaska
1DissentMannheimer, Judge
AS 28.35.0380 is the statute that defines the offense of driving under the influence and that specifies certain procedures and penalties pertaining to that offense. In 2004, in response to this Court's decision in Conrad v. State, the Alaska Legislature made two major changes to the DUI statute. For the reasons explained in this dissent, I conclude that one of the legislature's changes is constitutional, but the other is not.
Background of this case: this Court's construction of the DUI statute in Conrad
AS 28.35.080(a) defines two ways in which the operator of a motor vehicle can commit the…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Davis v. AlaskaSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Chambers v. MississippiSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Montana v. EgelhoffSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
- Fisher v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
- Neitzel v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 1982
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.