Dunkin v. State

818 P.2d 1159 (1991)

From our private database of 45,900+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Dunkin v. State

Alaska Supreme Court
818 P.2d 1159 (1991)

  • Written by Sharon Feldman, JD


Michael Dunkin (defendant) was indicted for murdering Julius Marshall, a Black male, by shooting Marshall three times in the head and neck at close range. The state (plaintiff) maintained that Dunkin shot Marshall for racial reasons. During voir dire, the prosecutor asked five prospective jurors whether they could give the victim a fair trial if race were an issue in the case. The final time the prosecutor posed the question, he asked whether the juror promised to give Marshall, a Black man, as well as the defendant, a fair trial. The court sustained Dunkin’s objection. Rephrasing the question, the prosecutor asked whether the juror could give the state as well as the defendant a fair trial knowing that Marshall was a Black man. Dunkin did not request a curative instruction. The evidence established that Dunkin and Dunkin’s brother and his friend went to the races and then four-wheeling in Dunkin’s jeep. The jeep had a removable top bearing the words “Boofer hunter.” “Boofer” was a derogatory slang term for a Black person. The jeep got stuck in the river. Marshall operated an auto-repair and towing business. While Marshall was towing Dunkin’s jeep out of the river, Dunkin told a spectator he was going to “waste the old spook.” After Marshall towed the jeep to his shop and got it started, Dunkin pulled out a gun and fired three shots into Marshall’s head and neck. As Dunkin drove away, he told his brother’s friend who had witnessed the shooting not to worry because it was “just a nigger . . . just a boofer.” The prosecutor stated at the end of his closing argument that Marshall had a right that justice be done. Dunkin did not object. Dunkin was convicted and argued on appeal that the prosecutor’s questions during voir dire and the statement in his closing argument were seriously prejudicial and constituted plain error. Dunkin maintained that Marshall was not on trial, the voir dire questions would have inflamed the jurors’ emotions because of evidence that the shooting was racially motivated, and the prosecutor’s closing argument called on the jury to avenge Marshall’s murder.

Rule of Law


Holding and Reasoning (Coats, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 735,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 735,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 45,900 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 735,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 45,900 briefs - keyed to 984 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership