Tyler C. Lockett

In State v. Adams, defendant Tieller M. Adams appealed his felony murder conviction following a no-contest plea, arguing the district court should have allowed withdrawal of the plea before sentencing because there was no good cause, the state's factual basis was insufficient, and his counsel provided ineffective assistance due to an undisclosed conflict of interest from prior representation of the victim. The opinion recounts the plea hearing, where the state summarized evidence including witness accounts of Adams threatening and shooting the victim over a drug debt, shell casings, autopsy results, and DNA linking the victim to Adams' shoes. The court held that a sufficient factual basis existed for felony murder, that Adams failed to show the conflict adversely affected counsel's performance or that he would have gone to trial absent it, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying withdrawal. The conviction was affirmed.

criminal lawprocedure

In State v. Bryan, the defendant was convicted of lewd and lascivious behavior after being found naked with an erection on his 13-year-old daughter's bed while she slept. The Kansas Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, ruling that K.S.A. 2004 Supp. 21-3508(a)(2) does not require the victim to be aware of the offender's exposed sex organ. The court reasoned that the statute prohibits exposing a sex organ in the presence of a non-spouse without consent with intent to arouse sexual desires, where "exposing" refers to the act itself without needing perception by the victim, and the offender's awareness of the victim suffices for the presence and intent elements.

criminal law

The case concerned whether Charles Myers, who was terminated from his county road department job and alleged retaliatory discharge after filing a workers' compensation claim, had properly given notice of his tort claim against Jackson County before suing. Myers' attorney sent the required claim letter and proposed petition to the county counselor, who forwarded it to the Board of County Commissioners; the Board reviewed and denied the claim without a hearing. The district court granted summary judgment to the Board, ruling that service on the counselor did not satisfy K.S.A. 2004 Supp. 12-105b(d), which requires filing with the clerk or governing body. The Court of Appeals reversed, but the Kansas Supreme Court held that actual notice and review by the Board did not constitute substantial compliance because the statute specifies the exact recipients and substantial compliance cannot create new methods of service. The Supreme Court therefore reversed the Court of Appeals and affirmed the district court's dismissal.

proceduretorts & liabilitylabor & employment

In State v. Green, the defendant was charged with second-degree murder and convicted of the lesser included offense of voluntary manslaughter as an aider and abettor after a fight outside a bar in which O.T. Ruffin died from blunt force trauma inflicted by multiple people, including Derrick Henderson. The Kansas Court of Appeals reversed the conviction on grounds that the evidence was insufficient because Green was chasing the victim's brother rather than directly participating in the attack on the victim and that death was not a foreseeable result of a bar fight. The Kansas Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and reinstated the conviction, concluding that the evidence viewed in the light most favorable to the State supported the jury's determination that the death was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the aggravated battery that Green aided and abetted and that Green's immediate flight and subsequent disappearance indicated consciousness of guilt.

criminal law

In State v. Ross, the defendant appealed his convictions for first-degree murder and attempted first-degree murder after a shooting at a Wichita club that killed one victim and injured another; he challenged the admission of evidence that he fled to Washington and of his gang affiliation with a defense witness, asserted cumulative trial errors, and claimed his criminal history should have been proven to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. The Kansas Supreme Court affirmed the convictions in full. It held that evidence of flight was properly before the jury, that gang-affiliation evidence was admissible to show the witness's bias despite its potential prejudice, that no individual errors existed to support a cumulative-error claim, and that established precedent permitted sentencing based on criminal history without jury proof.

criminal lawprocedure

In State v. Trotter, the defendant appealed his convictions for first-degree premeditated murder, capital murder, aggravated robbery, and conspiracy to commit aggravated robbery arising from a planned home invasion robbery that resulted in the shooting deaths of two victims. Trotter raised four issues on appeal: the trial court's failure to give an eyewitness identification instruction, the admission of evidence that one victim was pregnant, the State's use of peremptory strikes to remove nine of ten African-American jurors in violation of Batson, and the sufficiency of the evidence to support the convictions. The Kansas Supreme Court affirmed the convictions, holding that the trial court did not err in its jury instructions or evidentiary rulings, that the Batson claim was not properly preserved or supported by the record, and that the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, was sufficient for a rational factfinder to convict. The court emphasized deference to the trial court's credibility and sufficiency determinations without reweighing evidence.

criminal lawcivil rightsprocedure