Legal Opinion

Speidel v. State

Alaska Supreme Court

Decided October 21, 1969No. 1014PublishedCited by 80 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

DIMOND, Justice.

Appellant was convicted by a jury of failure to return a rented motor vehicle. From this conviction an appeal has been taken.

The indictment alleged a violation of AS 28.35.026. Appellant moved to dismiss the indictment because the statute failed to provide for proof of criminal intent before conviction. The motion was denied.

At trial it was shown that appellant had rented an automobile from Avis Rent-A-Car Company pursuant to a signed agreement, and had failed to return the automobile at the time stated in the agreement. In regard to the allegation that AS 28.35.026…

2Cases cited23 opinions

  1. Connally v. General Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
  2. Morissette v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1952
  3. Lanzetta v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 1939
  4. Stromberg v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1931
  5. Yates v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1957

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

3Cited by80 opinions

  1. RLR v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1971
  2. Gray v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1970
  3. Dawkins v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1988
  4. Lynden Transport, Inc. v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1975
  5. Kimoktoak v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1978

75 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