HOEKZEMA v. State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that because the judge \offered no explanation for his ruling\ in favor of the State on a sentencing issue, the reviewing court \presume[s] that the judge adopted the prosecutor's argument\
• “[The judge] offered no explanation for his ruling. We therefore presume that the judge adopted the prosecutor’s argument . . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Conley v. Alaska Communications Systems Holdings, Inc.
  Alaska Supreme Court· 2014-05-09· cited 11×
• SMJ Gen. Constr., Inc. v. Jet Commercial Constr., LLC
  Alaska Supreme Court· 2019-04-12· cited 4×
• Christopher R. Stacy v. State of Alaska
  Court of Appeals of Alaska· 2021-11-05· cited 3×
• Bochkovsky v. State
  Court of Appeals of Alaska· 2015-08-28· cited 1×

Cites

11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Michael v. State
  Alaska Supreme Court· 2005-06-09· cited 32×
• Eide v. State
  Court of Appeals of Alaska· 2007-10-05· cited 14×
• State v. Parker
  Alaska Supreme Court· 2006-11-09· cited 13×
• Garhart v. State
  Court of Appeals of Alaska· 2006-11-17· cited 11×
• Walker v. State
  Court of Appeals of Alaska· 1999-11-19· cited 10×
• Fleener v. State
  Court of Appeals of Alaska· 1984-08-17· cited 7×
• Dollison v. State
  Court of Appeals of Alaska· 2000-07-14· cited 4×
• Landon v. State
  Court of Appeals of Alaska· 1997-05-30· cited 3×
• Murray v. State
  Court of Appeals of Alaska· 2002-09-13· cited 2×
• State v. Smith
  Court of Appeals of Alaska· 2008-05-02· cited 1×
• Maness v. State
  Court of Appeals of Alaska· 2002-07-12· cited 1×