Case Name: Eugene SMITH, Appellant, v. STATE of Alaska, Appellee
Court: Alaska Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Alaska
Decision Date: 1981-03-20
Citations: 625 P.2d 310
Docket Number: No. 5227
Parties: Eugene SMITH, Appellant, v. STATE of Alaska, Appellee.
Judges: Before RABINOWITZ, C. J., and CON-NOR, BURKE and MATTHEWS, JJ.
Reporter: Pacific Reporter 2d
Volume: 625
Pages: 310–311

Head Matter:
Eugene SMITH, Appellant, v. STATE of Alaska, Appellee.
No. 5227.
Supreme Court of Alaska.
March 20, 1981.
Mitchel J. Schapira, Anchorage, for appellant.
Robert C. Bundy, Asst. Dist. Atty., Larry J. Weeks, Dist. Atty., Anchorage, Daniel W. Hickey, Asst. Atty. Gen., Avrum M. Gross, Atty. Gen., Juneau, for appellee.

Opinion:
OPINION
Before RABINOWITZ, C. J., and CON-NOR, BURKE and MATTHEWS, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Appellant was convicted upon his plea of nolo contendere to the crimes of inciting the commission of a crime in violation of AS 11.10.070 and grand larceny in violation of AS 11.20.140. The court sentenced appellant on the grand larceny count only, being of the view that multiple sentences were inappropriate under the rule established in Whitton v. State, 479 P.2d 302 (Alaska 1970). Appellant was sentenced to a term of three years of imprisonment with one year suspended and was required to make restitution. Based on our review of the record we conclude that the trial judge considered all relevant sentencing factors, properly refused to consider unverified hearsay reports of prior criminal acts, and that the sentence imposed was not clearly mistaken.
AFFIRMED.
. The factors were first defined in State v. Chaney, 477 P.2d 441, 444 (Alaska 1970).
. See Parks v. State, 571 P.2d 1003, 1004 (Alaska 1977); Sandvik v. State, 564 P.2d 20, 24 (Alaska 1976); Thurlkill v. State, 551 P.2d 541, 544 (Alaska 1976).