Michael Louis Wagner, Petitioner v. State of Alaska, Respondent

Summary

The Alaska Supreme Court affirmed the court of appeals and held that Wagner failed to preserve his claim challenging the use of his police statement for impeachment because he did not testify at trial. Applying the rule requiring a defendant to testify before seeking appellate review of a preliminary impeachment ruling, the court concluded that determining prejudice would require speculation about whether Wagner would have testified, whether the State would have used the statement, and what effect any impeachment would have had. The court did not reach the merits of whether the statement was constitutionally admissible for impeachment.