Theodore v. State
Alaska Supreme Court
1DissentRabino Witz, Justice
In this appeal the State concedes that “where two courts have concurrent jurisdiction of the same offense, the court which first acquires jurisdiction of the prosecution normally retains it to the exclusion of the other court as long as it is pending in that court.”1 A majority of this court has decided that application, or adoption, of this rule under the facts of this appeal is not necessary in the interest of justice. I disagree with the majority’s conclusion.
After recognizing that the appellant stood charged with the same offenses in two different courts of concurrent jurisdiction, the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Coleman v. StateMississippi Supreme Court · 1903
- State v. Van NessSupreme Court of Vermont · 1938
- Ex parte PageWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1916
- Haden v. DowdIndiana Supreme Court · 1939
- State v. HowellSupreme Court of South Carolina · 1951
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.