#Windows 98 emulator trial

Later on the morning of the incident, Hailstone, his wife, and his daughter Tinmiaq walked into the public safety building while the troopers were processing the people they had arrested. In addition to Carter, the troopers arrested four others, including Jack Wells, the person who had pointed a rifle at Tinmiaq. Hailstone's daughter, Tinmiaq, who was also involved in the fight, claimed that the person Carter cut had pointed a rifle at her. Among those arrested was Carter, who was charged with cutting a person with a knife. Ultimately, a number of people were arrested. They investigated various accusations made by the people who were present at, or who were aware of, the fight. A number of people, including Hailstone's stepson, Jonathon Carter, and Hailstone's daughter, Tinmiaq Hailstone, were involved.ДЄlaska State Troopers Christopher Bitz and Gordon Young flew to Noorvik that morning. On July 17, 2011, the village public safety officer in Noorvik contacted the Alaska State Troopers to report a fight involving several people and various weapons. BackgroundД«ecause Hailstone challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his convictions, we present the evidence in the light most favorable to the jury's verdicts.

#Windows 98 emulator trial

1 He raises five claims of error: (1) that there was insufficient evidence supporting his convictions, (2) that the trial judge should have sua sponte identified which of Hailstone's statements were allegedly false, (3) that all of his convictions should have merged because it was not clear which statements the jury found were false, (4) that the trial judge should have granted Hailstone's motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence, and (5) that it was error to admit into evidence an email Hailstone sent to the state troopers.ДЇor the reasons explained in this decision, we find no error and therefore affirm Hailstone's convictions.

'Chip' Hailstone was convicted of two counts of perjury and two counts of providing false information with the intent of implicating another in an offense. Accordingly, this memorandum decision may not be cited as binding authority for any proposition of law. See Alaska Appellate Rule 214(d) and Paragraph 7 of the Guidelines for Publication of Court of Appeals Decisions (Court of Appeals Order No.

Memorandum decisions of this Court do not create legal precedent.