Falcone v. State
Court of Appeals of Alaska
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BOLGER, Judge.
John Falcone repeatedly presented pleadings and courtroom objections based on his persistent belief that the Uniform Commercial Code and admiralty jurisdiction would provide a defense to the charges he faced at his criminal trial Superior Court Judge Philip M. Pallenberg eventually concluded that Falcone could not present his case in a rational and coherent manner, based on his irrational pleadings and objections, his obstreperous courtroom conduct, and a pretrial competency evaluation. We conclude that under these circumstances, the trial judge bad the discretion to deny…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Faretta v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Indiana v. EdwardsSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
- McCracken v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1974
- United States v. BerryCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2009
- United States v. FergusonCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2009
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Jensen D. v. State, Dept. of Health & Social Services, Office of Children's ServicesAlaska Supreme Court · 2018
- Barry H. v. State, Dept. of Health & Social Services, Office of Children's ServicesAlaska Supreme Court · 2017
- Steven Michael Hinshaw v. State of AlaskaCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2022
- State v. WilliamsOhio Court of Appeals · 2014
- Israel v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2011