Crime & Courts

A grand jury in Kenai has indicted Alaska state troopers Joseph Miller and Jason Woodruff on first-degree assault charges after they severely injured a local man while trying to detain him. The troopers had misidentified the man as someone subject to an arrest warrant.

The indictment was announced Thursday by the Alaska Department of Law. First-degree assault, a class A felony, carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison and a presumptive sentencing range of 7-11 years.

Woodruff and Miller are scheduled to appear in court on Nov. 12.

The two were previously indicted for fourth-degree assault, a misdemeanor.

When that lesser indictment was announced in August, it was an extraordinary act: Police in Alaska rarely face criminal prosecution for actions taken on the job.

But in a news conference, James Cockrell, commissioner of the Alaska Department of Public Safety, said that body camera footage made it clear that charges were warranted.

“When I reviewed this video, I was totally sickened by what I saw,” Cockrell said in August.

It was not immediately clear why prosecutors presented the case to jurors for a new indictment. A spokesperson for the Department of Law declined comment, citing the ongoing nature of the case.

“The Criminal Division always continues to evaluate our cases, even after charges are filed. The indictment represents a reassessment of the case, and the grand jury determined the higher charge was warranted,” said Deputy Attorney General John Skidmore in a prepared statement on Thursday.

A spokesperson for the Alaska Department of Public Safety said on Thursday that Miller and Woodruff remain employed by the department but have been off duty since Cockrell became aware of the incident that led to their indictment.

The spokesperson declined to say whether they are on paid or unpaid suspension.

Troopers’ union contract with the state says that “When a member is indicted … the member shall be placed on Authorized Leave Without Pay (LWOP) or allowed to use accrued personal leave pending the conclusion of the criminal proceeding.”

“The Alaska Department of Public Safety continues to fully cooperate with the Office of Special Prosecutions as they prosecute this case,” said the spokesperson, Austin McDaniel. “The alleged actions of Joe Miller and Jason Woodruff do not represent the work that the Alaska State Troopers do every day to protect Alaskans and ensure public safety.”

The Juneau Police Department arrested a Juneau man on Friday accused of spray painting swastikas at multiple locations in the Mendenhall Valley in recent weeks. 

Ryan Jaravata, 41, faces one felony charge of criminal mischief in the third degree related to the alleged crimes. 

Jaravata is now at Lemon Creek Correctional Center. He has been previously convicted of felony assault and is currently facing separate charges in July for damage to property value, trespassing and driving under the influence. 

Last week, Juneau police posted still images from security camera footage on its Facebook page of a person wearing dark clothing and drawing the symbol in red paint on a sign near the Mendenhall Glacier Recreation Area. The department asked the public for help in identifying the person.

In an interview earlier this week, police spokesperson Erann Kalwara said the person, later identified as Jaravata, is suspected of drawing the symbol at or around the Mendenhall Valley Public Library, Riverside Rotary Park and on a trail near Cinema Drive. 

According to the state court system, his first court appearance has not been scheduled as of Friday afternoon. 

The Juneau Police Department is looking for a man suspected of spray painting swastikas at multiple locations in the Mendenhall Valley.

The department posted an image of the suspect on its Facebook page last week. In the still taken from security camera footage, he appears to be wearing dark clothing with a beanie while drawing the symbol in red paint on a sign near the Mendenhall Glacier Recreation Area. 

According to JPD spokesperson Erann Kalwara, police believe the suspect also drew the symbol at or around the Mendenhall Valley Public Library, Riverside Rotary Park and on a trail near Cinema Drive. 

“Since the end of September we’ve received at least eight separate reports of graffiti that are very similar in nature,” she said. “At this time, we’re assuming it’s the same person who’s responsible for it.”

Kalwara said the Department has received several tips from community members since the Facebook post last week, but the man has yet to be identified or taken into custody. 

“JPD is following up on all of the reports that the public and property owners are providing, and so that’s been really great that folks are calling in,” she said. “If anybody knows the identity of the person that we have captured on film and provided by one of the victims of the graffiti, that would be great.”

She encourages anyone with information to call JPD dispatch at 907-586-0600 or submit an anonymous tip through the Juneau Crimeline.

Correction: This story previously misspelled Erann Kalwara’s name. 

An Alaska man convicted of cyberstalking will get a new trial after revelations that the judge handling his case received nude photos from a government attorney involved in his prosecution.

Former U.S. District Court Judge Joshua Kindred resigned in early July, days ahead of a report by the 9th Circuit’s Judicial Council that he had inappropriate, sexualized relationships with two prosecutors. Kindred also created a hostile work environment for his law clerks, including one he sexually harassed, and sent inappropriate text messages to his staff, the report said.

That has left a lingering question of whether Kindred’s relationships with the prosecutors – like the one who assisted in the cyberstalking prosecution and sent him nude photos – affected his impartiality.

The prosecutors worked in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for Alaska, which has identified more than 40 cases with potential conflicts that it is reviewing. At the same time, the Department of Justice’s Office of Professional Responsibility is investigating how the Alaska U.S. Attorney’s Office handled the matter.

And as first reported by Bloomberg Law, at least one defendant on the list of cases under review has won a new trial.

On Friday, a new judge assigned to the case issued a ruling that Rolando Hernandez-Zamorra, whom a jury convicted in June of cyberstalking his ex, should get a new trial. The judge is filling in from Oregon because, with Kindred’s resignation, there is only one active judge currently working in the District of Alaska.

Hernandez-Zamorra’s attorney, Alexis Howell, said text messages were the basis of the government’s case against her client and that he deserved a new trial because of the potential conflict of interest and the similarities between his case and the findings in the report on Kindred.

“His conduct with some of his law clerks could, under the federal statute, be constituted as cyberstalking, and that’s what my client was charged with,” Howell said. “I think there’s some serious concerns when you have a judge sitting in judgment of somebody that’s charged with essentially the same crime as what he’s committed.

Hernandez-Zamorra’s conviction came just a few days before Kindred’s resignation, apparently prompted by the imminent release of the 9th Circuit’s report, which was based on an 18-month investigation.

Because of that timeline, Howell said, the U.S. Attorney’s Office either knew or should’ve known more than it revealed about the judge’s inappropriate relationship with a senior assistant U.S. Attorney who was in the courtroom for the proceedings and advising the prosecutors in Hernandez-Zamorra’s case.

“Rolando was forced to take it at face value that he had a fair trial, and the reality was he didn’t,” Howell said.

The new judge agreed and said even if he had not seen evidence that Kindred’s relationship with the prosecutor had caused him to be biased against Hernandez-Zamorra, the appearance of such a bias was enough to justify a new trial, Howell said.

Ultimately, a new trial will take much more time and money, said Howell, who was assigned to represent Hernandez-Zamorra under the Criminal Justice Act, meaning she and defense experts are paid with federal taxpayers’ money, because Hernandez-Zamorra was unable to afford a private attorney.

That’s on top of the salaries of the judge and prosecutors and the jury members’ time that was wasted, she said.

“I mean, it’s not a cheap, easy thing to run a federal criminal trial,” Howell said. “And essentially, what’s happened is now we have to go back to square one to guarantee that Rolando has a trial that’s fair and meets his constitutional rights of due process.”

Hernandez-Zamorra is just one of the dozens of defendants whose attorneys are seeking to have their clients’ indictments or convictions thrown out. Legal experts say reviewing Kindred’s cases and dealing with the fallout is taking time and resources away from other work the U.S. Attorney’s Office is tasked with, including prosecuting drug conspiracies and cybercrime.

A spokesperson for the U.S. Attorney’s Office did not respond to a request for comment.

In a first-of-its-kind ruling, the Alaska Supreme Court said Friday that the COVID-19 pandemic does not qualify as “physical loss” or “damage” under common commercial insurance policies.

The decision likely means that insurance companies will not have to pay most claims related to business losses caused by COVID-19.

The ruling came in response to an unusual “certified question” request from Alaska’s U.S. District Court. All 49 other state supreme courts have considered similar questions about COVID-19 liability, but until Friday, Alaska’s had not.

“Even with our insured-friendly approach to interpreting insurance contracts, we conclude that neither the presence of the COVID-19 virus at an insured property nor operating restrictions imposed on an insured property by COVID-19 pandemic-related governmental orders is ‘direct physical loss of or damage to’ property. ‘Direct physical loss of or damage to’ property requires a tangible or material alteration of property,” wrote Justice Susan Carney on behalf of the court.

The court’s decision, rendered unanimously, has major financial implications: If the court had decided differently, the ruling could have allowed businesses to collect millions of dollars from their insurance policies to cover the costs of COVID-mandated closures and health restrictions.

In an amicus brief, the American Property Casualty Insurance Association said insurance premiums would rise as a result if insurers were required to pay out more.

The Supreme Court was asked to rule after Baxter Senior Living filed suit two years ago against its insurance company, Zurich American.

Baxter operates a senior home in Anchorage and spent money to enact anti-COVID procedures that also limited its operations. Local anti-COVID rules also restricted its operations. The company filed a claim in 2020 with Zurich American, but the company denied the claim.

At the time, Zurich American said Baxter’s policy covered “direct physical loss of or damage to” property, and it argued that “(n)either the mere presence of the COVID-19 virus … or any generalized threat from its presence constitutes the ‘direct physical loss of or damage to’” Baxter’s property under the policy.

Baxter challenged the denial in state court, and the insurer moved the case to federal court, which then asked the Alaska Supreme Court to decide whether the presence of COVID-19 constitutes “direct physical loss” or “damage” to property, and whether governmental orders pertaining to COVID-19 also constitute that loss or damage.

“Our answer to both questions is ‘no,’” Carney wrote in Friday’s published order.

Explaining at length, the order says that meeting the policy’s standard language requires “a physical alteration of property,” and COVID-19’s presence on a surface doesn’t alter its property.

“An analogy between the COVID-19 virus and water illustrates this point,” Carney wrote in Friday’s order. “COVID-19 is to property what water is to a plastic sheet: water does nothing to a plastic sheet but at most, it stays on it or attaches to it. But water transforms, alters, or changes the state of dry paper into a wet “mush” or makes it much easier to tear.”

“We conclude that ‘direct physical damage’ requires physical alteration of property. But because COVID-19 does not physically alter property and merely attaches to it, the presence of COVID-19 on property does not constitute ‘direct physical damage.’”

Friday’s order marked the first time since 2021 that the court had been asked to consider a certified question from the state’s federal court.

With the question resolved, the case returns to federal court for further proceedings.

The former Hoonah City School District superintendent has filed a complaint against the local school board over a conflict with its president that allegedly led to the superintendent’s dismissal.

In court filings, former Superintendent Helen Cheek claims that school board President Harold Houston “continually overstepped the legal constraints of his authority over the Hoonah District.”

The complaint details a scenario wherein Houston sought to influence personnel matters and daily school management. Court filings allege he made multiple efforts to access confidential information about school employees, entered the school to tell teachers how to teach and asked the district’s finance manager to complete work for him.

Cheek is seeking damages in the amount of the wages and benefits of her unfinished three-year contract, emotional distress, damage to her professional reputation and attorney’s fees. She had not completed the first year of her contract when she was fired by the board; the job listing shows her salary would have been in the range of $100,000-$115,000 a year.

“Despite the allegation that the termination was without cause, Plaintiff Cheek firmly believes that the termination was directly and proximately caused by her exercise of her First Amendment right to object to Mr. Houston’s conduct that violated public policy, state law and the school board policies,” the complaint said.

The Hoonah City School District board has not yet answered the complaint with Alaska’s District Court and neither the board nor Cheek’s attorney’s office responded to a request for comment.

Houston’s alleged efforts to influence the daily operations of the district manifested in three to four unscheduled meetings with Cheek each week and unannounced visits to the school while she was away, court filings say. After Cheek set boundaries to prohibit that behavior, he refused to speak with her at board meetings and, within a month, she was fired by the board, the complaint says.