James N. Brannen v. State Alaska

James N. Brannen, Sr., was convicted in Fairbanks of three counts of sexual abuse of a minor in the first degree and two counts
of sexual assault in the first degree. On appeal, he claims that venue in Fairbanks was improper and that the indictment should
have been dismissed because the grand jury heard evidence impermissibly referring to his exercise of his right to remain silent.
Brannen also objects to the denial of his motion to suppress a tape recorded conversation between himself and K.E., his stepdaughter.
We affirm. Brannen first started abusing K.E. when she lived with him and her mother in Healy. After the Brannens separated and K.E.
and her mother moved to Fairbanks, the abuse continued there. The indictment charged two counts for the offenses that occurred
in Fairbanks and three counts for the offenses that occurred in Healy. At arraignment on November 24, 1987, Brannen moved
orally to sever the Healy counts and requested trial of those counts in Healy. Healy was not then an approved site for felony
trials, but Criminal Rule 18 had been amended to include Nenana as an approved site for felony trials. This amendment, however,
did not become effective until approximately six weeks after Brannen's arraignment. See Administrative Bulletin No. 27. The
court denied Brannen's motion. Two and one-half months after arraignment, on February 11, 1988, Brannen filed a written motion
for severance and change of venue, again requesting severance of the Healy charges. This time he asked that the Healy charges
be tried in Nenana rather than Healy. Superior Court Judge Jay Hodges denied the motion to sever, concluding that venue was
proper on all charges in Fairbanks. On appeal, Brannen contends that the court erred in its ruling.