Nathawn Katurl Johnson, Petitioner v. State of Alaska, Respondent

Summary

The Alaska Supreme Court held that an unpreserved double‑jeopardy claim is a fundamental error that warrants full appellate review on the merits, and that Johnson’s separate convictions for oral and vaginal sexual assault do not violate either the Alaska or federal double‑jeopardy prohibitions. Accordingly, the Court reversed the Court of Appeals’ refusal to review the claim but affirmed the conviction and sentence. The decision also rejected the invited‑error doctrine as inapplicable to Johnson’s case.