Evans v. State
| Decision Date | 03 February 1978 |
| Docket Number | No. 3175,3175 |
| Citation | 574 P.2d 24 |
| Parties | Otto EVANS, Appellant, v. STATE of Alaska, Appellee. |
| Court | Alaska Supreme Court |
Before BOOCHEVER, C. J., and RABINOWITZ, CONNOR, BURKE and MATTHEWS, JJ.
Otto Evans was convicted of possession of heroin in violation of AS 17.10.200(a) 1 and sentenced to five years imprisonment with two years suspended. He appeals on the grounds that requested instructions concerning an alleged informant's testimony were not given and that the sentence was excessive.
The witness in question was a "special police officer" at the time of the incident but was an informer at the time he testified at trial. Therefore, the informer instruction should have been given, according to our holding in Fresneda v. State. 2
We conclude, however, that the superior court's failure to give Evans' proposed instructions was harmless error in the context of this record. Defense counsel had ample opportunity to cross-examine the witness as to his former convictions, his drug use and his work as a paid informer and did so at length. As a result, any bias, prejudice or interest of the witness was fully exposed for the jury's use in determining credibility. Moreover, the court did give an instruction to the jury to take into account the interest, bias or prejudice of any witness. 3 In light of the facts in this case, we find that the failure to give the instructions did not appreciably affect the verdict, 4 and therefore, the conviction is affirmed.
With reference to the sentence appeal, we hold that a trial judge need only demonstrate consideration of sentencing goals stated in State v. Chaney, 477 P.2d 411 (Alaska 1970). The trial court need not recite the goals of sentencing as long as it is clear that it has considered those goals. In this case, we find that the judge did consider those goals and hold that he was not clearly mistaken in imposing the sentence.
AFFIRMED.
1 AS 17.10.200(a) provides:
Penalties. A person who violates any provision of this chapter except a provision relating to the keeping of records, upon conviction, is punishable by a fine of not more than $5,000 and by imprisonment for not less than two nor more than 10 years. For a second offense, or for a first offense where the offender has previously been convicted of a violation of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Buckley v. State
...his biases and motives for testifying. Any error resulting from the failure to give the cautionary instruction is harmless. Evans v. State, 574 P.2d 24 (Alaska 1978). Other contentions raised by the appellant are without The judgment is affirmed. MOWBRAY, C. J., MANOUKIAN and GUNDERSON, JJ.......
-
State v. Spurr
...45 (2d Cir.1982), cert. denied sub. nom., Errante v. United States, 460 U.S. 1070, 103 S.Ct. 1525, 75 L.Ed.2d 948 (1983); Evans v. State, 574 P.2d 24 (Alaska 1978). The judgment of conviction is WALTERS, C.J., and SWANSTROM, J., concur. ...