## Facts

- Komson I. Spencer and David Williams spent March 13, 2004 drinking with acquaintance Nathaniel Ahsoak at their trailer in North Pole, Alaska; Spencer’s girlfriend Sasha Dennis was present.
- After Ahsoak called Nicole James for a ride, he accidentally pushed Dennis and she fell; Williams hit Ahsoak for pushing her.
- When James arrived, Spencer opened the door only slightly, told her she could not enter, stated Ahsoak “was not leaving,” and blocked Ahsoak when he tried to leave.
- James looked through a window and saw Williams strike Ahsoak in the stomach; she left.
- Inside, Spencer shaved Ahsoak’s head while Williams held him down; Spencer later glued a pornographic picture to Ahsoak’s head with super glue.
- After a later fight between Ahsoak and Williams, Ahsoak tried to leave but was prevented; Spencer concluded Williams was losing and Spencer and Williams agreed to tie Ahsoak up.
- Spencer kicked Ahsoak’s legs out, Williams pulled him down, and they bound Ahsoak’s wrists and legs with tape.
- Over several hours, while Ahsoak remained bound, Spencer and Williams continued to assault him.
- Spencer was convicted of kidnapping and first-degree assault and received a composite sentence of 10 years’ imprisonment.

## Issues

1. Whether the trial court’s accomplice-liability jury instructions correctly stated the requirements for accomplice liability and whether any claimed defect required reversal.
2. Whether the victim was competent to testify despite being intoxicated while testifying and admitting intoxication could affect his truthfulness, and whether the court should have struck his testimony.
3. Whether the evidence was sufficient to support convictions for kidnapping and first-degree assault under accomplice-liability principles.

## Decision

- The Alaska Court of Appeals affirmed Spencer’s convictions and composite sentence.
- The court held the accomplice-liability instructions, read as a whole, adequately conveyed the statutory standards and did not mislead the jury.
- The court held the trial judge did not abuse discretion in allowing Ahsoak to testify; intoxication affected credibility for the jury, not legal competency, where the witness could communicate coherently.
- The court concluded the evidence supported findings that Spencer actively aided and encouraged the restraint and assaults, supporting liability for kidnapping and first-degree assault.

## Legal Principles

- Accomplice liability may be established where a defendant, with the required intent, solicits, aids, or abets another in committing the charged offense; active participation and purposeful assistance can support conviction.
- Jury instructions are evaluated in context of the full charge; minor wording disputes do not warrant reversal unless the instructions, taken as a whole, materially misstate the law or mislead the jury.
- A witness’s intoxication generally bears on credibility and weight, not competency, so long as the witness can perceive, recall, and communicate; trial courts have broad discretion to assess competency based on in-court observation.
- Appellate review defers to the trial court’s competency determination absent an abuse of discretion, and to the jury’s credibility determinations where testimony is coherent and subject to cross-examination.

## Conclusion

The court affirmed Spencer’s kidnapping and first-degree assault convictions, finding sufficient evidence of purposeful assistance to support accomplice liability, approving the accomplice-liability instructions as adequate when read as a whole, and holding that an intoxicated but coherent victim remained competent to testify, with credibility left to the jury.


Spencer v. State, 164 P.3d 649 (Alaska Ct. App. 2007)