Legal Opinion
Henry v. State
Alaska Supreme Court
Decided October 10, 1980No. 4563PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MATTHEWS, Justice.
On this appeal of his burglary conviction, Daniel Henry challenges the procedures by which the police obtained his fingerprints. He contends first that he was illegally detained without probable cause, so that the fingerprints must be suppressed, and second that if his detention was legal his consent to fingerprinting was tainted, because he was not advised of his right to refuse consent.
On the evening of August 3,1978, a home in Anchorage was burglarized. The police obtained a set of fingerprints of the suspected burglar. Two persons living near the burglarized house…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Oregon v. MathiasonSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Davis v. MississippiSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1975
- Cooksey v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1974
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Waring v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1983
- Doyle v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 1981
- Howard v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 1983
- G. R. v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 1981
- Lowry v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 1985
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.