State v. Lancaster , 1976 Alas. LEXIS 309 ( 1976 )

BOOCHEVER, Chief Justice,

with whom CONNOR, Justice, joins, dissenting.

While I agree with the majority that the offenses committed 'here constitute very serious crimes, I cannot find that the trial court was clearly mistaken under all of the circumstances in imposing concurrent sentences of seven years with five years suspended.¹ The sentencing judge carefully considered all appropriate criteria, and while if I had been given the same task, I might well have imposed a different sentence, I do not believe that the trial judge was clearly mistaken.

1 . We have affirmed similar or lesser sentences for other serious crimes causing death or harm to a person. See, for example, State v. Howey, 495 P.2d 1270 (Alaska 1972) (manslaughter — three year suspended sentence); Gregory v. State, 492 P.2d 108 (Alaska 1971) (manslaughter—seven years with three suspended); Grow v. State, 517 P.2d 756 (Alaska 1973) (assault with a dangerous weapon— five years with two suspended); Nielsen v. State, 492 P.2d 122 (Alaska 1971) (assault with a dangerous weapon — three years). See also Erwin, R., “Five Years of Sentence Review in Alaska”, 5 U.C.L.A.-Alaska L.Rev. 1-21 (1975).