State v. Saathoff

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “the intent to make theft by receiving a continuing crime does not ‘plainly appear’” in Alaska’s receiving stolen property statute
• eoncluding that theft by receiving is not a continuous offense and that the word “retain” describes a defendant’s actions at a particular point in time
• holding statute was ambiguous because it was “susceptible to two different reasonable interpretations”
• declining to address policy arguments when language and legislative purpose made statute's meaning clear

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).