 |
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Alto v. State2/14/2003
This case raises the question of whether a person who is found not guilty by reason of insanity and committed to the custody of the Commissioner of Health and Social Services can be convicted of escape for removing himself from that custody. We conclude that the defendant can be convicted of escape under these circumstances.
Facts and proceedings
Frank A. Alto brutally beat and killed a woman in 1973. He was convicted of rape, grand larceny, and murder in the first degree in a court trial. On appeal, the Alaska Supreme Court reversed Alto's convictions and ordered that a judgment of not guilty by reason of insanity under former AS 12.45.083 be entered against Alto because the court determined that the State had not proved beyond a reasonable doubt that Alto was sane. On remand, the trial court found that Alto was "suffering from a mental disease or defect that causes him to be a danger to the public peace and safety." The court committed Alto to the custody of the Commissioner of Health and Social Services for a term not to exceed 30 years.
Alto was committed to the Alaska Psychiatric Institute. While he was returning from a field trip to Girdwood, Alaska, Alto managed to evade the person who was guarding him. He was later located and detained in New York State after which an Alaska State Trooper returned him to Alaska. The State charged Alto with escape in the second degree, a class B felony. In a trial conducted by Superior Court Judge Larry D. Card, a jury convicted Alto. Judge Card sentenced Alto to 6 years of imprisonment. Alto appeals his conviction and his sentence. We affirm.
Whether an individual who is adjudicated not guilty by reason of insanity may be convicted of escape
In order to convict a person of escape in the second degree, the State must prove that the person unlawfully "removed [himself] from official detention for a felony." Alto contends that because he was found not guilty by reason of insanity of his felony offenses, he was not in official detention for a felony, and therefore he could not be convicted of felony escape. Alto was charged with violating AS 11.56.310(a)(1)(B), which provides that: "One commits the crime of escape in the second degree if, without lawful authority, one removes oneself from official detention for a felony or for extradition." Alaska Statute 11.81.900(b)(39) defines "official detention" as: "custody, arrest, surrender in lieu of arrest, or actual or constructive restraint under an order of a court in a criminal or juvenile proceeding, other than an order of conditional bail release."
Alto does not contest that he was in "official detention" as defined in this statute. Instead, he argues that his detention was not "for a felony." He argues that the phrase "official detention for a felony" does not apply to individuals who are found not guilty by reason of insanity and subsequently committed because the commitment is not "in connection with or in reference to a felony." Specifically, he contends that " he felony charge for which an insanity acquittee is initially detained is merely an allegation which brings an individual to the attention of the court. The subsequent commitment is in reference to and in connection with the defendant's mental status and its relationship to public safety." Because the issue that Alto raises is one of statutory interpretation, this court must review it de novo.
This court addressed the definition of the phrase "for a felony," as contained in AS 11.56.310(a)(1)(B), in State v. Stores. In Stores, a police officer arrested Stores on a felony warrant for a parole violation. Stores was on parole on a felony burglary conviction. Stor
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Alaska DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
|
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|