Comeau v. State

Comeau was prosecuted for driving while intoxicated on a single theory, that his driving was impaired by the consumption of alcohol. Consequently, this case will have little effect as a precedent.1 Nevertheless, *119it seems to me that even in this peculiar case, reckless driving is not a lesser-included offense of driving while intoxicated. The majority’s decision resurrects the related offense doctrine rejected in State v. Minano, 710 P.2d 1013, 1016 (Alaska 1985). Its conclusions are therefore problematic. I am fortified in this belief by the fact that every jurisdiction that has considered…