![]() ![]() ![]() 1 He raises five claims of error: (1) that there was insufficient evidence supporting his convictions, (2) that the trial judge should have sua sponte identified which of Hailstone's statements were allegedly false, (3) that all of his convictions should have merged because it was not clear which statements the jury found were false, (4) that the trial judge should have granted Hailstone's motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence, and (5) that it was error to admit into evidence an email Hailstone sent to the state troopers.įor the reasons explained in this decision, we find no error and therefore affirm Hailstone's convictions.īecause Hailstone challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his convictions, we present the evidence in the light most favorable to the jury's verdicts. "Chip" Hailstone was convicted of two counts of perjury and two counts of providing false information with the intent of implicating another in an offense. Richards, Attorney General, Juneau, for the Appellee.īefore: Mannheimer, Chief Judge, Allard, Judge, and Coats, Senior Judge. Kerry, Girdwood, for the Appellant.Įric Ringsmuth, Assistant Attorney General, Office of Criminal Appeals, Anchorage, and Craig W. 2KB-11-746 CR, Kotzebue, Ben Esch, Judge. UNPUBLISHED See Alaska Appellate Rule 214(d)Īppeal from the Superior Court, Second Judicial District, No.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |