Legal Opinion
Myers v. Municipality of Anchorage
Court of Appeals of Alaska
Decided April 7, 2006No. A-8739PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MANNHEIMER, Judge.
This appeal involves a constitutional attack on the Municipality of Anchorage’s “drug *1177paraphernalia” ordinances — a trio of laws that, read together, prohibit the possession and sale of items connected with the manufacturing, dispensing, storing, and use of controlled substances.
The parties to this appeal describe the main issue as whether these ordinances are too “vague”. Vagueness is, indeed, one of the problems with these laws. As we discuss in detail below, the definition of “drug paraphernalia” codified in AMC 08.35.010 can not easily be understood or applied.…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Speidel v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1969
- Kimoktoak v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1978
- Hentzner v. StateAlaska Supreme Court · 1980
- Treacy v. Municipality of AnchorageAlaska Supreme Court · 2004
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Barber v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2016
- Jordan and Letendre v. StateCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2016
- Myers v. Municipality of AnchorageCourt of Appeals of Alaska · 2006