TOPEKA—A three-judge panel of the Kansas Court of Appeals will hear six appeals in Manhattan Tuesday, September 16, as part of on-campus U.S. Constitution Observance Day activities.
Hearings will take place in two sessions — at 9 a.m. and 1 p.m. — in Forum Hall in the Kansas State University Student Union.
The appeals are from Jewell, Marshall, Riley and Saline counties.
Chief Judge Thomas E. Malone will preside over the hearings and he will be joined on the bench by Judge Henry W. Green Jr. and Judge Michael B. Buser.
Malone said the cases on appeal demonstrate how courts interpret and apply laws adopted by our Legislature and the rights guaranteed to all by the U.S. Constitution.
"The constitutional rights we enjoy are tested every day in cases like these in courts throughout our state and across the nation,” Malone said. “This shows, in a very practical sense, how courts ensure these rights are upheld.”
Attorneys for each side will have an opportunity to argue their points before the judges and the judges will ask questions about the cases and arguments being made. When oral arguments conclude, the three-judge panel will meet to discuss the cases and then issue written opinions in about 60 days.
When the oral arguments are complete, the judges will be available to talk with students.
These hearings are part of Constitution Day observance activities at Kansas State University. Congress directed federally funded educational institutions to host educational events about the United States Constitution on or about September 17 each year. The Constitution was signed September 17, 1787, by a majority of delegates to the Constitutional Convention.
Following are summaries of the cases to be heard by the Court of Appeals panel:
9 a.m. Tuesday, September 16, 2014
Appeal No. No. 111,077: City of Marysville v. Matthew Dale Sain
The City of Marysville charged Matthew Dale Sain in municipal court with one count each of domestic battery and disorderly conduct. At Matthew’s trial, the municipal court refused to compel one of the city's witnesses, Rachel Sain, to testify following her decision to invoke her Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. Shortly thereafter, the case against Matthew was dismissed. The city subsequently appealed to the district court, alleging the municipal court erred when it refused to compel Rachel's testimony and when it dismissed the case. However, the Marshall County District Court dismissed the city's appeal, finding that the double jeopardy clause of the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution precluded the city from seeking to reinitiate its prosecution of Matthew. The city appeals. Issues raised are whether the city has statutory authority to appeal the municipal court's order of dismissal; and whether the double jeopardy clause prevents the city from appealing the municipal court's order of dismissal and/or seeking to have the matter against Matthew reinstated for trial.
9:45 a.m.
Appeal No. No. 110,445: State of Kansas v. John Elmer Goodpasture Jr.
John Elmer Goodpasture Jr. was convicted of 21 counts of sexual offenses, including rape and aggravated indecent liberties with a child. The Riley County District Court sentenced Goodpasture to life in prison. He appeals. Issues raised are whether the district court abused its discretion when it denied Goodpasture's third request to expand the bill of particulars; whether the district court abused its discretion by denying Goodpasture's motion for new trial; whether the district court erred by admitting prior sexual misconduct evidence under K.S.A. 60-455(d); and whether K.S.A. 60-455(d) is unconstitutionally overbroad.
10:30 a.m.
Appeal No. 111,504: In the Matter of the Marriage of Steven D. Dickson II and Lucyl M. Dickson
In February 2014, the Riley County District Court granted Steven D. Dickson II and Lucyl M. Dickson a divorce, awarding Lucyl primary residential custody of the parties' minor son. Steven was ordered to pay child support, as well as spousal maintenance for 36 months. Issues raised are whether the district court abused its discretion by awarding $1,300 per month in spousal maintenance; whether the district court erred by considering Lucyl's work-related child care expenses in calculating child support when Steven presented evidence that his family could provide child care at no cost; whether the district court erred by awarding Lucyl primary residential custody; and whether the district court improperly denied Steven sufficient time to present his evidence at trial.
1 p.m.
Appeal No. 110,816: State of Kansas v. Scott A. Janssen
The Jewell County District Court convicted Scott Janssen of driving under the influence. He appeals. Issues raised are whether the district court erred by denying Janssen's motion to suppress and by admitting evidence regarding open containers after it entered a directed verdict on the open container charge. Also, whether the district court committed judicial misconduct.
1:45 p.m.
Appeal No. 110,568: State of Kansas v. Wendell L. Parrish
A jury convicted Wendell Parrish of one count each of distributing a controlled substance (i.e., hydromorphone) within 1,000 feet of a school and conspiracy to commit or assist in the commission of the offense of distribution of a controlled substance. The Riley County District Court sentenced him to a controlling prison term of 74 months. He appeals. Issues raised are whether the district court erred by improperly instructing the jury on the elements of the crimes of unlawfully distributing a controlled substance and conspiring to distribute such a substance and by denying Parrish's motion to dismiss based on speedy trial grounds. Also, whether the state presented sufficient evidence to support Parrish's convictions for distribution of a controlled substance and conspiracy to distribute a controlled substance and whether the state's evidence was sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Parrish distributed a controlled substance within 1,000 feet of a property that satisfies the statutory definition of a school.
2:30 p.m.
Appeal No. 111,401: State of Kansas v. Gregory Michael Nece
After Gregory Michael Nece was arrested for driving under the influence, he received an implied consent advisory notice and consented to a breath test, which revealed his blood alcohol level was above the legal limit. Nece moved to suppress the test results, arguing that the coercive nature of the implied consent advisory rendered his consent involuntary and violated his rights under the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The Saline County District Court agreed and suppressed the breath test results and the state pursued this interlocutory appeal. Issues raised are whether the district court erred by finding that the implied consent advisory was inherently coercive and rendered Nece's consent to the breath test involuntary.