Davis v. State
In Davis v. State, 766 P.2d 41 (Alaska App. 1988), the Court held that a defendant could be convicted of a drug offense and separately convicted for keeping or maintaining the building used to commit that same drug offense.
In Davis, the defendant was convicted of possessing cocaine with intent to deliver, and separately convicted of maintaining the building -- his own house -- where he distributed the cocaine.
The defendant argued that his convictions should merge, but the Court affirmed the separate convictions.
The Court's treatment of Davis's double jeopardy argument consisted of one conclusory paragraph:
"Davis next contends that the double jeopardy clause of the Alaska Constitution prohibits separate convictions and sentences for possession of cocaine with intent to deliver, AS 11.71.030(a)(1), and knowingly maintaining a dwelling used for keeping or distributing cocaine, AS 11.71.040(a)(5). We find no merit to this claim. While Davis' violation of both statutes resulted from a single course of action, the offenses differ markedly in the conduct that they prohibit and in the specific social interests that they seek to preserve. Davis' double jeopardy rights were not infringed by the entry of separate convictions and sentences on these charges."