Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Hicks v. State

Court of Appeals of Alaska

Decided June 24, 2016No. 2506 A-11826Published

1Concurrence

Judge MANNHEIMER,

concurring.

There are significant problems - with Hicks's conviction in this case, but those problems are not raised in Hicks's appeal.

As explained in Judge Allard's lead opinion, Hicks raises one argument on appeal: the argument that, absent an explicit grant of authority by the legislature, .a court has no authority to prohibit a defendant from contacting the victim of the alleged offense while the defendant is in jail awaiting trial,. I join Judge Allard in rejecting. that argument-but I nevertheless have reservations about the validity of Hicks's conviction.

The fact that…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Bennett v. BennettAlaska Supreme Court · 2000
  2. John v. BakerAlaska Supreme Court · 2005
  3. Luckart v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2012

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API