Lane v. State — Without “Some Evidence” of Post-Driving Drinking, Defense Instruction Not Required
The Alaska Court of Appeals affirmed Lane’s DUI conviction under AS 28.35.030(a)(2), holding that the post-driving-drinking defense under AS 28.35.030(s) requires “some evidence” of actual post-driving consumption before a trial court must instruct the jury; an eight-minute gap between watercraft operation and a traffic stop, standing alone, did not meet that threshold. The court also called on the Criminal Pattern Jury Instructions Committee to revise the blood-alcohol-level DUI instruction to address its tension with the post-driving-drinking defense statute.