Legal Opinion
Clark v. Municipality of Anchorage
Court of Appeals of Alaska
Decided May 13, 2005No. A-8674PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
STEWART, Judge.
Scott R. ■ Clark was convicted of operating a motor vehicle without a current liability insurance policy in violation of Anchorage Municipal Code (AMC) 09.28.030. That ordinance provides that an owner or operator of a motor vehicle must have “a current motor vehicle liability policy, or other security that complies with Alaska Statutes Title 28, when operating the vehicle within the municipality.”
Clark raises several constitutional arguments relating to his conviction. Clark claims that the district court should have suppressed his admission that he had no insurance…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Berkemer v. McCartySupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Dorman v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1981
- Smith v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1973
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Fallon v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2010
- Collier v. Municipality of AnchorageCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2006
- Clark v. Municipality of AnchorageCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2005
- James Henry Perozzo v. State of AlaskaCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2021