Skip to main content

State v. McDonald

Citations

  • 872 P.2d 627
  • 1994 Alas. App. LEXIS 15
  • 1994 WL 129030

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that evidence that “may well be exculpatory in the limited sense that it may be the kind of evidence skilled counsel might develop” does not necessarily “tend to negate [a defendant’s] guilt in its own right”
  • defining exculpatory evidence as evidence that “tends, in and of itself, to negate the defendant’s guilt”
  • “In the present case, the utterance ... was couched as a question but it was phrased in such a manner as to make it an implicit assertion of the fact.”
  • no unanimity required regarding whether the defendant personally committed the murder or, instead, aided or abetted another person's commission of the murder
  • \[C]onjecture based on the relative strength of competing theories of guilt can be no substitute for certainty when the double jeopardy clause is implicated. Any ambiguity must be resolved in favor of the accused.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Bryner, Coats, Andrews, Mannheimer

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

43 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

63 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.