Opinion ID: 1364196
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 19

Heading: one witness signature on absentee ballot

Text: Appellees contend that certain absentee ballots should not have been counted because in each case the voter's certificate on the back of the absentee ballot envelope had the signature of only one attesting witness. They contend this was in violation of AS 15.20.150 which they allege requires the signatures of two witnesses. The court below found that AS 15.20.150 was amended by § 1 ch. 16 SLA 1977 to eliminate the requirement of two witnesses for absentee ballots cast by mail or personal representative. The new version of the statute allows casting of an absentee ballot in the presence of an attesting wit ness ... . (emphasis added) Confusion has arisen because in the amended version of the statute there remains language from the old statute which refers to a now deleted portion, and to attesting wit nesses.  (emphasis added) The use of the plural form of the word witness, we determine, was a legislative oversight  an error in drafting. See Informal Opinion of the Attorney General (3/30/77). The superior court concluded that the clear intent of the legislature is that a single witness is sufficient and that the ballots with a single witness signature were properly counted. We agree with that conclusion. There is no malconduct involved.