Legal Opinion · Dissent

Erickson v. State

Court of Appeals of Alaska

Decided April 25, 2008No. A-8942Published

1DissentCoats, Chief Judge

I start with the proposition that the exelu-sionary rule generally extends only to evidence that the police discovered by acting illegally1 I would uphold Judge Hopwood's decision that the evidence, which the police used to convict Erickson, was not a product of the illegal search of Erickson. Therefore, the exelusionary rule would not apply to exclude the evidence.

In the present case, we have previously held that Trooper Hazelaar had authority to stop the car in which Erickson was a passenger and to order Erickson out of the car.2 But we concluded that the record did not establish that the…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Wong Sun v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  2. People v. ThomasCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1970
  3. Smith v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1997
  4. Beagel v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 1991
  5. Erickson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2006

2 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