Oliver Floyd Lemon v. State Alaska

This appeal arises from a conviction for the crime of burglary not in a dwelling under AS 11.20.100. Appellant Oliver Floyd Lemon maintains that evidence of a small speck of safe insulation alleged to have come from the premises and later discovered in one of his pants pockets was improperly admitted since the insulation was the product of a warrantless seizure and search of the clothing he was wearing at the time of his arrest, and there was no probable cause for a detailed analysis of said clothing. Lemon further argues that he was denied his right to confrontation under the sixth and fourteenth amendments to the United States Constitution and article I, section 11, of the Alaska Constitution by the admission of hearsay testimony of an alleged accomplices statements when the declarant was not available for effective cross-examination due to the privilege against self-incrimination. In addition, appellant urges that the imposition of the maximum sentence of five years was excessive.