Franzen v. State
Alaska Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
BURKE, Justice.
This is a sentence appeal. 1 Appellant’s sole contention is that the superior court erred in considering certain information appearing in his presentence report. 2 He makes no direct claim that the sentence was excessive.
That portion of the presentence report complained of consists of the following statements:
It is said that [appellant] was associating with a former Eagle River [prison] inmate and that his circle of friends consisted of known drug users and dealers. Norman does not deny this implication, and he will not indicate who his friends were. 3
Prior to sentencing…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Williams v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
- State v. ChaneyAlaska Supreme Court · 1970
- People v. Chi Ko WongCalifornia Supreme Court · 1976
- Evans v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1976
- Nukapigak v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1977
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Schmid v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1980
- Cockerham v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1997
- Campbell v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1979
- Manderson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 1983
- Tritt v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 1981
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.