DOCSLIB.ORG

Alaska Court System Annual Report FY 2019: July 1, 2018 – June 30

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Alaska Court System Annual Report FY 2019: July 1, 2018 – June 30 Alaska Court System Annual Report FY 2019 July 1, 2018 = June 30, 2019 . • - ..- -- Alaska Court Locations, FY 2019 Utqiagvik Second Judicial District / Pt. Hope •I-._ \ Kotzebue Fort Yukon Fourth Judicial District Nome Fairbanks Galena• Unalakleet Nenana • • • Delta Junction Tok Emmonak • Hooper Bay Palmer Glennallen Aniak Bethel Anchorage Valdez Kenai Cordova Yakutat Skagway Seward Haines Dillingham Homer Juneau Naknek Hoonah St. Paul Third Judicial District • Angoon Sitka Petersburg Kodiak Wrangell Kake Prince of Wales Ketchikan First Judicial District Sand Point Unalaska Front matter Cover page 303 K STREET ANCHORAGE, ALASKA 99501 CHRISTINE E. JOHNSON (907) 264-0548 Administrative Director FAX (907) 264-0881 The Alaska Court System is pleased to present its FY 2019 annual report. As in previous years, we have designed the report to serve as a reference source for all concerned with the administration of justice in Alaska — legislators and other government officials, researchers, the media, and the general public. The report presents statistical data on court activity, summary budget information, and a review of technological developments. The names and photographs of all the judicial officers and primary court administrators who served during FY19 are also included, along with maps showing court locations in the four judicial districts. We provide an overview of court administrative functions, including programs and initiatives that have involved partnerships with the other branches of state government. The court system uses public resources for its operations. We reiterate our commitment to careful management of these resources and believe that this report gives a picture of our stewardship. As I hope this annual report reflects, our state court system is committed to ensuring that all who come into the stateʼs courts receive fair and considered attention. Sincerely, Christine Johnson Administrative Director Fishing boats and humpback whale, Lynn Canal (First Judicial District) Alaska Court System Annual Report FY 2019 July 1, 2018 – June 30, 2019 © Copyright 2019 by the Alaska Court System. Layout and compositing by Melissa S. Green, Field of Words, Anchorage, AK. Printed by Northern Printing, Inc., Anchorage, AK. A bookmarked PDF version of this annual report is available on the Alaska Court System website at http://www.courts.alaska.gov/. Kotzebue Sound, Seward Peninsula, Norton Sound, and Ahklun Mountains from the International Space Station, 27 Apr 2019 iv Contents Alaska Court Locations, FY 2019 (map) ....................................................................................inside front cover Introduction to the Alaska Court System .............................................................................1 What is a Court Case? ............................................................................................................3 How are Judges Chosen? .......................................................................................................4 Other Justice System Participants .........................................................................................5 The Alaska Supreme Court ....................................................................................................6 Supreme Court Jurisdiction ....................................................................................................................6 Figure A. Alaska Court System Structure and Flow of Civil and Criminal Appeals ............................................................. 7 Court of Appeals ....................................................................................................................8 Court of Appeals Jurisdiction ...............................................................................................................8 Trial Courts ............................................................................................................................8 Superior Court .........................................................................................................................................8 District Court ...........................................................................................................................................9 Year in Review .........................................................................................................................11 Year in Review ...................................................................................................................... 13 Highlights of Court System Work ....................................................................................... 14 Changes in Rural Courts .......................................................................................................................14 Court Staffing — First Judicial District, Summer 2019 ...................................................................15 Alaska Jurors and Juries ........................................................................................................................16 Grand Juries ............................................................................................................................................16 Alaska State Court Law Library ..........................................................................................................17 Therapeutic Courts ................................................................................................................................18 Children’s Issues .....................................................................................................................................19 Self-Help Services ..................................................................................................................................20 Debt Collection ......................................................................................................................................21 Aging and Legal Needs .........................................................................................................................22 Justice for All ..........................................................................................................................................23 Legal Navigator ......................................................................................................................................23 Meeting Language Interpretation Needs ...........................................................................................24 Relations with Tribes and Tribal Courts ............................................................................................26 Judicial Development ............................................................................................................................27 Alaska Criminal Justice Commission ..................................................................................................28 Criminal Justice Working Group .........................................................................................................28 Non-Judicial Employee Developments ...............................................................................29 Clerks of Court Conference ................................................................................................................29 Employee Advisory Committee ..........................................................................................................30 Civic Education and Court System Outreach ..................................................................... 31 Public Media ...........................................................................................................................................31 Supreme Court LIVE ...........................................................................................................................32 Success Inside and Out .........................................................................................................................33 Color of Justice ......................................................................................................................................34 v Developments in Technology ..............................................................................................35 E-Filing ....................................................................................................................................................35 Court Website and Technical Developments ....................................................................................36 Court System Facilities ........................................................................................................37 Court Buildings ......................................................................................................................................37 Budgetary Overview ............................................................................................................38 Figure B. Alaska Court System Budget within State of Alaska FY15 Operating Budget..................................38 Figure C. Alaska Court System Budget in Total Justice-Related Operating Budget, FY15 .................................39 Judges and Court Administrative Staff................................................................................41 Alaska Supreme Court .........................................................................................................43
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Alaska Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Year in Review 1996
    YEAR IN REVIEW Alaska Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Year in Review 1996 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction .............................................................................. 167 II. A dm inistrative Law ................................................................. 167 A . Public Contracting .................. ..... ............. 167 B. Land Use and Resource Management ........................... 171 C. A dm inistrative Procedure ............................................... 175 III. Business Law ............................................................................ 176 IV . Civil Procedure ........................................................................ 178 A. Timeliness of Prosecution and Appeal .......................... 179 B . M odification of Judgm ent ............................................... 181 C. M iscellaneous .................................................................... 183 V . Constitutional Law .................................................................. 188 A . D ue Process ....................................................................... 188 B . D ouble Jeopardy .............................................................. 191 C. Right to Jury Trial ............................................................ 192 D . M iscellaneous .................................................................... 193 V I. Crim inal Law ............................................................................ 197 A . Constitutional Protections ..............................................
    [Show full text]
  • STATE V. JENKINS--FIRST DISSENT
    ****************************************************** The ``officially released'' date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal or the date it was released as a slip opinion. The operative date for the beginning of all time periods for filing postopinion motions and petitions for certification is the ``officially released'' date appearing in the opinion. In no event will any such motions be accepted before the ``officially released'' date. All opinions are subject to modification and technical correction prior to official publication in the Connecti- cut Reports and Connecticut Appellate Reports. In the event of discrepancies between the electronic version of an opinion and the print version appearing in the Connecticut Law Journal and subsequently in the Con- necticut Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the latest print version is to be considered authoritative. The syllabus and procedural history accompanying the opinion as it appears on the Commission on Official Legal Publications Electronic Bulletin Board Service and in the Connecticut Law Journal and bound volumes of official reports are copyrighted by the Secretary of the State, State of Connecticut, and may not be repro- duced and distributed without the express written per- mission of the Commission on Official Legal Publications, Judicial Branch, State of Connecticut. ****************************************************** STATE v. JENKINSÐFIRST DISSENT KATZ, J., dissenting. Both the fourth amendment to the United States constitution and article first, § 7, of the Connecticut constitution protect individuals against unreasonable searches and seizures. In this case, it is undisputed that the initial stop of the defendant, Chris- topher Jenkins, for improperly changing lanes was rea- sonable and, therefore, valid under both of these provisions.
    [Show full text]
  • The 2021-2022 Guide to State Court Judicial Clerkship Procedures
    The 2021-2022 Guide to State Court Judicial Clerkship Procedures The Vermont Public Interest Action Project Office of Career Services Vermont Law School Copyright © 2021 Vermont Law School Acknowledgement The 2021-2022 Guide to State Court Judicial Clerkship Procedures represents the contributions of several individuals and we would like to take this opportunity to thank them for their ideas and energy. We would like to acknowledge and thank the state court administrators, clerks, and other personnel for continuing to provide the information necessary to compile this volume. Likewise, the assistance of career services offices in several jurisdictions is also very much appreciated. Lastly, thank you to Elijah Gleason in our office for gathering and updating the information in this year’s Guide. Quite simply, the 2021-2022 Guide exists because of their efforts, and we are very appreciative of their work on this project. We have made every effort to verify the information that is contained herein, but judges and courts can, and do, alter application deadlines and materials. As a result, if you have any questions about the information listed, please confirm it directly with the individual court involved. It is likely that additional changes will occur in the coming months, which we will monitor and update in the Guide accordingly. We believe The 2021-2022 Guide represents a necessary tool for both career services professionals and law students considering judicial clerkships. We hope that it will prove useful and encourage other efforts to share information of use to all of us in the law school career services community.
    [Show full text]
  • ENGAGED PRACTICE PLAN OPENS DOORS for STUDENT ARTISTS New Requirement Helps Bring Their Work Into the World
    Founded in 1882, Cleveland Institute of Art is an independent college of art and design committed to leadership and vision in all forms of visual arts education. CIA makes enduring contributions to art and education and connects to the community through gallery exhibitions, lectures, a continuing education program and Link the Cleveland Institute of Art Cinematheque. FALL 2016 NEWS FOR ALUMNI AND FRIENDS OF CLEVELAND INSTITUTE OF ART ENGAGED PRACTICE PLAN OPENS DOORS FOR STUDENT ARTISTS New requirement helps bring their work into the world Classrooms and studios are an art comes in,” Whittey says. “Students go out “Students go out into the world, more bubbly and happy,” Brantley says. student’s best friends, but nothing into the world, meet with people they’ve “With another person, he had a very strong broadens perspective like field learning. never met with before, work for them, meet with people they’ve personality, so I drew him in a very dramatic With that in mind, CIA academic leaders work with them, and do problem solving never met with before, work setting so that would come across. Then I this fall introduced a new measure to together. They learn how to be professional, made his facial features a little stronger.” ensure that students earn at least three however they define that.” for them, work with them, and Brantley brings away from the course Engaged Practice credits by graduation. For more than 20 years, CIA’s Industrial some practical lessons, like scheduling The requirement will give them experience Design students have worked with teams at do problem solving together.” visits and working within a medical working with a range of professional Fisher Price and Little Tikes to gain experi- environment.
    [Show full text]
  • Shelter from the Storm: the Case for Guaranteed Income
    THE PENNSYLVANIA MAY|JUN21 GAZETTE Shelter from the Storm: The Case for Guaranteed Income The Long Road to mRNA Vaccines Memoirs for All Ages Virtual Healthcare Gets Real DIGITAL + IPAD The Pennsylvania Gazette DIGITAL EDITION is an exact replica of the print copy in electronic form. Readers can download the magazine as a PDF or view it on an Internet browser from their desktop computer or laptop. And now the Digital Gazette is available through an iPad app, too. THEPENNGAZETTE.COM/DIGIGAZ Digigaz_FullPage.indd 4 12/22/20 11:52 AM THE PENNSYLVANIA Features GAZETTE MAY|JUN21 Fighting Poverty The Vaccine Trenches with Cash Key breakthroughs leading to the Several decades since the last powerful mRNA vaccines against big income experiment was 42 COVID-19 were forged at Penn. 34 conducted in the US, School of That triumph was almost 50 years in the Social Policy & Practice assistant making, longer on obstacles than professor Amy Castro Baker has helped celebration, and the COVID-19 vaccines deliver promising data out of Stockton, may only be the beginning of its impact on California, about the effects of giving 21st-century medicine. By Matthew De George people no-strings-attached money every month. Now boosted by a new research center at Penn that she’ll colead, more Webside Manner cities are jumping on board to see if Virtual healthcare by smartphone guaranteed income can lift their residents or computer helps physicians out of poverty. Will it work? And will 50 consult with and diagnose patients policymakers listen? much more quickly, while offering them By Dave Zeitlin convenience and fl exibility.
    [Show full text]
  • Examining the Work of State Courts 2004, A
    3 4185 00319802 4 Examin ng the Work of State Courts, 2004 A National Perspective from the Court Statistics Project I. x .I L. m m.rm Incoming :% imbm 9,911 93.514 38 522 Connectcut 36 450 Wlswnsin 55 138 NOnh Dakota 6.296 % lowa m 314 Sanh Dakota 6 277 lllinrx 96 320 Califomla 2d6 034 Kansas 18 527 Mnnewa 29 125 Y KF 180 .C74A m c. 4 Examining the Work of State Courts, 2004 ..- A National Perspective from the Court Statistics Project __ . -__ -. mmm Edited by 15,mDm- Richard Y. Schauffler 1 Robert C. LaFountain ,omm -- Neal B. Kauder Shauna M. Strickland Court Statistics Project Staff and Contributors Richard Y. Schauffler, Director Fred L. Cheesrnan, Senior Court Research Associate Neal B. Kauder, Consultant, VisualResearch, Inc. Robert C. LaFountain, Court Management Consultant Shauna M. Strickland, Court Research Analyst Nicole L. Waters, Court Research Associate Brenda G. Otto, Program Specialist Library Mational Center for State Courts 300 Newport Ave. Williamsburg, VA 231 85 A joint project of the Conference of State Court Administrators, the Bureau of Justice Statistics, and the National Center for State Courts' Court Statistics Project 0 Copyright 2005 National Center for State Courts ISBN 0-89656-253-0 Suggested Citation: R. Schauffler, R. LaFountain, N. Kauder, & S. Strickland, Examining tbe Work of State Courts, 2004: A National Perspectioefrom tbe Court Statistics Project (National Center for State Courts 2005) This report was developed under Grant 2003-BJ-CX-KI03Supplement # 01 from the Bureau of Justice Statistics Points of view are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the Bureau of Justice Statistics : Acknowledgments 0 I ' The members of the Court Statistics Project do not necessarily represent the policies of (CSP) gratefully acknowledge assistance and that agency.
    [Show full text]
  • Court of Appeals Staff Attorney Requires Administration and Procedure
    The Position and Organization The Alaska Court of Appeals invites Train and supervise law clerks when they applications for a Court of Appeals Staff perform the technical reviews of draft court Attorney I or II to be based in either decisions, and when the law clerks check legal Anchorage or Fairbanks. Under general briefs submitted by attorneys to ensure they direction of the Chief Judge, the incumbent conform to the requirements of the Appellate will perform legal work for the judges of the Rules. Court of Appeals. In addition, in consultation with the Chief Judge and other judges of the Court, the staff attorney will provide An Ideal Candidate assistance to the Chief Judge, the Clerk of the Appellate Courts, and the staff of the Appellate Clerk’s Office regarding matters of A Court of Appeals Staff Attorney requires administration and procedure. Duties may substantial knowledge of: include the following: • General legal principles and their application, particularly criminal law. Prepare legal memoranda and/or draft • Methods of legal research and sources opinions that thoroughly analyze and evaluate for finding the law. the issues presented in Court of Appeals cases; • Procedures of the Court of Appeals. Perform technical review of draft opinions to • The rules of trial procedure and ensure the accuracy of the facts recited in the evidence. opinion, the correctness of the legal propositions relied on by the Court, and the logic of the Court’s decision; Perform a final review of draft decisions for accuracy, conformity with established
    [Show full text]
  • The Year in Review 2018: Selected Cases from the Alaska Supreme
    THE YEAR IN REVIEW 2018 SELECTED CASES FROM THE ALASKA SUPREME COURT AND THE ALASKA COURT OF APPEALS Introduction .....................................................................................................................................1 Administrative Law .........................................................................................................................2 Business Law ...................................................................................................................................7 Civil Procedure ................................................................................................................................9 Constitutional Law ........................................................................................................................14 Criminal Law .................................................................................................................................18 Criminal Procedure ........................................................................................................................21 Election Law ..................................................................................................................................37 Employment Law ..........................................................................................................................40 Environmental Law .......................................................................................................................44 Evidence Law ................................................................................................................................45
    [Show full text]
  • House Votes $70 Million for El Salvador
    Tax platform divides Mrs. Chaves,-81, Decker’s stumble GOP planning committee still avid bowler Is a costly one ... page 4 ... page 11 ... page 15 Mostly cloudy; Manchester, Conn. chance of showers Saturday. August 11. 1984 — See page 2 iiattrliralpr Hrralh Single copy: 25C: House votes $70 million for El Salvador By Robert Shepard dispute that threatened passage of issue back to the House for another give democracy a chance." fiscal year ending Sept. 30, The two lesser amount. United Press International the $6.2 billion supplemental vote. Speaker Thomas O'Neill, who houses were about $2 billion apart A $90 million compromise was spending bill needed to keep most Rep. Clarence Long, D-Md., continued to oppose the aid, said in their original versions of the bill, offered during the conference if WASHINGTON - The House government agencies operating chairman of the House Appropria­ earlier Friday the House probably but the confehutee committee committee meeting Thursday abandoned its opposition to more until the end of the fiscalyearSept. tions subcommittee on foreign would agree to a compromise came up with a $5.8 billion night, but was rejected by most of military aid for El Salvador this 30. operations who originally opposed figure. compromise on the non-aid the majority Democrats oh the year and voted Friday for $70 The action also cleared the way any additional aid, eased his O'Neill said that since the provisions. panel. A $70 million offer also was million of the $117 million sought for Congress to recess until after position and offered an amend­ previous House vote some key The most urgent item was $700 rejected.
    [Show full text]
  • Jeffrey M. Feldman Litigation, Environmental (206) 676-7066 [email protected]
    315 Fifth Avenue South, Suite 1000 Seattle, Washington 98104 Jeffrey M. Feldman Litigation, Environmental (206) 676-7066 [email protected] Profile Introduction Jeff maintains an active trial and appellate practice, focusing on complex civil and criminal matters. He has substantial trial experience, before judges and juries, and has appeared as counsel and argued more than 75 appeals to the Alaska Supreme Court, Alaska Court of Appeals, Idaho Supreme Court, Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, and Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. Jeff's trial experience encompasses a broad range of matters, including environmental and antitrust cases, oil and gas disputes, constitutional claims, commercial and corporate litigation, and insurance and personal injury matters. Jeff’s criminal practice focuses on corporate and environmental matters. He has defended companies, corporate officers, and employees in most of the significant environmental matters prosecuted in Alaska, including the Exxon Valdez grounding, the prosecution of timber companies, passenger cruise ship operators, and airline operators for Clean Water Act and Clean Air Act violations, and state and federal environmental prosecutions of oil companies drilling on Alaska’s North Slope. Jeff also has handled public corruption prosecutions, perjury cases, federal false statement and false claims charges, and Alaska’s only impeachment inquiry. Before joining Summit Law Group, Jeff was the founding partner at Feldman Orlansky & Sanders in Anchorage, Alaska. Jeff is also a Professor of Law at the University of Washington School of Law, has served as an instructor for the National Institute of Trial Advocacy, and is a frequent CLE lecturer. 315 Fifth Avenue South, Suite 1000 Seattle, Washington 98104 Representative Cases/Matters State of Alaska v.
    [Show full text]
  • Alaska Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Year in Review 1995
    YEAR IN REVIEW Alaska Supreme Court and Court of Appeals Year in Review 1995 Table of Contents ................................. 95 I. Introduction .................................. 97 II. Administrative Law ............................ 97 A . General .................................. 97 B. Open Meetings Act ......................... 100 C. Fish and Game ............................ 101 D. Local Boundary Commission .................. 103 III. Business Law ................................. 104 A. Commercial Law .......................... 104 B. Insurance ................................. 105 C. Contracts ................................ 108 IV. Civil Procedure .............................. 112 A . General .................................. 112 B. Attorney's Fees ........................... 122 C. Arbitration ............................... 124 V. Constitutional Law ............................ 126 VI. Criminal Law ................................. 133 A . General .................................. 133 B. Criminal Procedure ......................... 145 C. Ineffective Assistance of Counsel ............... 155 D. Sentencing ................................ 158 E. Evidence ................................. 164 VII. Election Law ................................. 166 VIII. Employment Law .............................. 168 A. General ................................. 168 B. Workers' Compensation ...................... 171 IX. Environmental Law ............................ 177 X. Family Law .................................. 179 96 ALASKA
    [Show full text]
  • A Revolt in the Ranks: the Great Alaska Court-Bar Fight*
    ARTICLES A Revolt in the Ranks: The Great Alaska Court-Bar Fight* PAMELA CRAVEZ** This Article details the post-statehood controversy between the Alaska Supreme Court and the Alaska Bar Association known as the "court-barfight." First,the Article discusses United States v. Stringer, a 1954 attorney discipline case illustrating the territorial courts' perceived inability to regulate adequately the legal Copyright © 1996 by Alaska Law Review * This article is excerpted from Pamela Cravez, Seizing the Frontier, Alaska's Territorial Lawyers (1984) (unpublished manuscript, on file with the author). The author would like to thank Professor Thomas West of Catholic University for his helpful comments on earlier drafts and Jeffrey Mayhook for his insightful editing. She would also like to thank Senior U.S. District Court Judge James M. Fitzgerald, Anchorage District Court Judge James Wanamaker, Glenn Cravez, Joyce Bamberger, Averil Lerman and Patsy Romack for their careful reviews and the Anchorage Bar Association for its generous support of Alaska's Territorial Lawyers: An Oral History. Editor's note: The author has drawn much of the material for this article from Anchorage Bar Ass'n, Alaska's Territorial Lawyers: An Oral History, an unpublished series of taperecorded interviews commissioned by the Anchorage Bar Association and conducted by the author. The audiocassettes are located at the former U.S. District Courthouse in Anchorage, Alaska. Unless otherwise indicated by citation, the information and quotations in this article have been drawn from this source. The editors, however, have not independently verified the information derived from the oral history. Accordingly, we rely on the author's representations as to the authenticity and accuracy of the statements drawn therefrom.
    [Show full text]