Rule 101 - Scope and Applicability(a)General Applicability. There are three courts in the Alaska judicial system -- the Supreme Court, the Superior Court, and the District. Trials, both civil and criminal, are conducted at the Superior Court and District Court level. The judges who sit on these courts should find the new Rules of Evidence no more difficult to apply -- and hopefully somewhat easier -- than common law rules. But magistrates, whose authority is delimited under AS 22.15, are working on a part time basis and may find the New Rules difficult. Nevertheless, experience has shown that they exhibit a workable grasp of the existing rules of evidence. Thus, this subdivision states that the Rules of Evidence shall apply in cases tried before magistrates as well as judges. These rules are not applicable in areas directly covered by other rules promulgated by the Alaska Supreme Court. For example, Criminal Rule 5.1(d) as amended (preliminary examinations in criminal cases) and Criminal Rule 6(r) (grand jury) govern the admission of evidence in their respective areas. See, State v. Gieffels, 554 P.2d 460 (Alaska 1976). Children's Rules specifying special rules of evidence for children's proceedings will remain in effect (e.g., 13(a) (2)), unless they are superseded by these Rules (e.g., 17(a)).
(b)Rules of Privilege. This subdivision implements the privilege article of the rules. "It recognizes that confidentiality once destroyed cannot be restored, and that a privilege is effective only if it bars all disclosure at all times." 5 Weinstein's Evidence Paragraph 1101 [1]. (c)Rules Inapplicable. It should be noted that this rule does not decide the reach of constitutional principles as applied to admission of illegally seized evidence. See State v. Sears, Reporter's Comment to that rule. (1)Preliminary Questions of Fact. Paragraph (1) states for convenience, the provisions of Rule 104(a), supra. See Reporter's Comment to that rule. (2)Miscellaneous Proceedings. Extradition and rendition proceedings are essentially administrative, and traditionally the rules of evidence have not applied. 1 Wigmore §4(6). The rules of evidence have not been regarded as applicable to sentencing or probation proceedings, where great reliance is placed upon the presentence investigation and report. This is in accord with previous law. Cf. State v. Sears, supra.
Warrants for arrest, criminal summonses, and search warrants are issued upon complaint or affidavit showing probable cause. The nature of the proceedings make application of the formal rules of evidence inappropriate and impractical.
Because summary contempt proceedings are not full adversary contests but immediate responses to special problems of misbehavior, the rules of evidence do not apply.
Habeas corpus hearings are treated like all other cases under subdivision (b), supra, and the rules apply in these hearings.
Alaska Comm. R. Evid. 101