Opinion
Court of Appeals No. A-10437.
February 23, 2011.
Appeal from the Superior Court, Third Judicial District, Palmer, Trial Court No. 3PA-08-1491 Cr, Kari Kristiansen, Judge.
David D. Reineke, Assistant Public Defender, and Quinlan Steiner, Public Defender, Anchorage, for the Appellant. Kerry A. Corliss, Assistant District Attorney, Palmer, and Daniel S. Sullivan, Attorney General, Juneau, for the Appellee.
Before: Coats, Chief Judge, and Mannheimer and Bolger, Judges.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Russell D. Blakeman Jr. appeals his convictions for driving while his license was revoked or suspended, for refusing to submit to a breath test (felony level), and for failing to stop at the direction of a police officer (in the first-degree). These charges arose from an incident where the Palmer police stopped a suspect vehicle, and then the driver fled. The sole question on appeal is whether the evidence presented at Blakeman's trial was sufficient to establish that he was the one driving the vehicle.
AS 28.15.291(a), AS 28.35.032(p), and AS 28.35.182(a), respectively.
When we evaluate the sufficiency of the evidence to support a jury's verdict, we must view that evidence (and all reasonable inferences to be drawn from that evidence) in the light most favorable to upholding the verdict.
See, e.g., Hinson v. State, 199 P.3d 1166, 1170 (Alaska App. 2008).
In Blakeman's case, the State presented evidence that, before the driver fled, the officer conducting the traffic stop was able to observe the driver's face, both from the side and in a straight-ahead view (when the driver turned his head to look at the officer). The officer also observed that the driver had tattoos on both hands. Later, after the driver fled, and after the police (assisted by a tracking dog) arrived at a house where they believed the driver might have fled, the officer who conducted the traffic stop observed Blakeman and immediately recognized him as the driver.
This evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the jury's verdict, is sufficient to support the conclusion that Blakeman was the driver. Accordingly, the judgement of the superior court is AFFIRMED.