How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site.
    Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask Marcus Parker Your Own Question
Marcus Parker
Marcus Parker, Lawyer
Category: Criminal Law
Satisfied Customers: 460
Experience:  practicing attorney
Type Your Criminal Law Question Here...
Marcus Parker is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

I received a dui in alaska but had 3 priors from when I was ...

Customer Question

I received a dui in alaska but had 3 priors from when I was younger the judge sentenced me to 4yrs with 2yrs suspended. So 2yrs to serve well I am doing my time on an ankle monitor with DOC and my sentence was presumptive so I was told that I am not eligible for parole I talked to the main person with the DOC and he said there is a blakely law that might be able to change that so that I could be eligible for parole my question is do you know about this law and will it work with my circumstances?
Submitted: 8 years ago.
Category: Criminal Law
Expert:  Marcus Parker replied 8 years ago.

A "Blakely law" would have been adopted since the date of Blakely v. Washington, which was decided in 2004.

2005 AK. ALS 2 gives, as it's legislative intent, the following:

"LEGISLATIVE INTENT. It is the intent of the legislature in passing this Act to preserve the basic structure of Alaska's presumptive sentencing system, which is designed to avoid disparate sentences. With this Act, the legislature sets out a sentencing framework, subject to judicial adjustment for statutory aggravating or mitigating factors that are determined in a manner that is constitutional under the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Blakely v. Washington. The single, definite presumptive terms set out in current law can unduly constrain the sentencing process, particularly under the mandates of Blakely v. Washington. Although the presumptive terms are being replaced by presumptive ranges, it is not the intent of this Act in doing so to bring about an overall increase in the amount of active imprisonment for felony sentences. Rather, this Act is intended to give judges the authority to impose an appropriate sentence, with an appropriate amount of probation supervision, by taking into account the consideration set out in AS 12.55.005 and 12.55.015."

Hope that helps.

Related Criminal Law Questions