Bear v. State

I dissent from the majority’s holding that the Supreme Court of Alaska lacks jurisdiction to review criminal sentences.1 I reach this conclusion on the basis of this court’s own prior precedents and upon analysis of the policy considerations inherent in the question.

The issue of appellate review of criminal sentences was first presented to this court in State v. Pete.2 There the appellee-defendant contended that his imprisonment for two years was “unduly harsh and that the sentence should be reduced.”3 We modified the sentence which had been imposed to the term of imprisonment already…