TOPEKA—A three-judge panel of the Kansas Court of Appeals will hear oral arguments Tuesday, March 15, at the University of Saint Mary DePaul Library, 4100 S. 4th Street, Leavenworth.
Judges Karen Arnold-Burger, Henry W. Green Jr. and Steve Leben will hear oral argument in six criminal cases at dockets that convene at 9 a.m. and 1:30 p.m. The panel will also decide 12 cases without argument based on the parties' written submissions.
Arnold-Burger, the presiding judge for the panel, said that the Court of Appeals regularly hears cases throughout the state.
"We look forward to the opportunity to visit a place as rich in Kansas history as Leavenworth. An integral part of that history is the University of St. Mary. We plan to meet with students to discuss the work of the Kansas courts and to discuss the role fair and impartial courts play in our democracy," Arnold-Burger said.
Arnold-Burger added that in addition to making the court accessible to more Kansans, hearing cases around the state saves money for the parties.
Oral Arguments
Attorneys for each side will have an opportunity to present argument to the judges, and the judges will have a chance to ask questions. The court will then take each case under consideration and will issue a written decision at a later date, usually within about 60 days.
The appeals to be heard in Leavenworth arose in Wyandotte and Johnson counties. In addition to the Court of Appeals panel hearing cases this week in Leavenworth, other three-judge panels of the Court of Appeals will be hearing cases in Wichita and Topeka. All hearings are open to the public.
There are 14 judges on the Court of Appeals, and the judges sit in three-judge panels to decide cases. In fiscal year 2015, the Court of Appeals resolved appeals in 1,978 cases, including 1,340 in which the court issued a formal written opinion.
The six cases to be heard in Leavenworth are summarized as follows:
9 a.m. Tuesday, March 15, 2016
No. 113,071 State of Kansas v. Choncey Allen Stamps, appeal from Wyandotte County
A jury convicted Stamps of interfering with law enforcement, felon in possession of a firearm, and possession of cocaine. On appeal, Stamps argues that his convictions must be reversed for three reasons. First, Stamps argues that the trial court erroneously allowed inadmissible hearsay into evidence, which resulted in reversible error because it violated his Sixth Amendment right to confront his accusers. Second, Stamps argues that the trial court erred when it denied his motion to suppress the cocaine seized from his car because the police illegally seized and searched his car. Third, Stamps argues that the state violated his due process rights by failing to disclose exculpatory evidence in violation of the United States Supreme Court's holding in Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S. Ct. 1194, 10 L. Ed. 2d 215 (1963).
9:45 a.m. Tuesday, March 15, 2016
No. 113,211 State of Kansas v. Ian Woolverton, appeal from Johnson County
In August 2014, police responded to a domestic disturbance in a Johnson County home. After interviewing those involved, police arrested Ian Woolverton for misdemeanor domestic battery. Woolverton was found guilty of the charge after trying his case before a judge. Woolverton appealed his conviction, arguing that he was denied the right to a jury trial. He argues that misdemeanor domestic battery is a serious offense and that, because of this, he had a constitutional right to a jury trial, which he did not waive. The state argues, however, that because misdemeanor domestic battery is not punishable by more than six months in prison, both Kansas Supreme Court and United States Supreme Court precedent hold that it is a petty offense, that is not guaranteed the right to a jury trial under the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution or Section 5 of the Kansas Constitution Bill of Rights. Woolverton also argues that he did not knowingly and intelligently waive his statutory right to jury trial and asks the court to remand his case for a new trial.
10:30 a.m. Tuesday, March 15, 2016
No. 113,175 State of Kansas v. Jesse Stephen Steffens, appeal from Johnson County
Steffens pled guilty to two counts of felony theft. At sentencing, the district court ordered Steffens to serve 34 months in prison and to pay restitution for some of the stolen goods. Specifically, the district court found that the amount of restitution owed was $62,076.80, but ordered repayment of only $2,400 with the caveat that the prisoner review board could increase that amount at the time of Steffens release from prison if it found that Steffens' financial circumstances had changed and he was able to pay more. Steffens now appeals arguing that (1) the sentence was illegal because it authorized the prisoner review board to increase the amount of restitution; and (2) the district court abused its discretion when it ordered Steffens to pay $2,400 in restitution because Steffens did not have the financial means to pay even that limited amount.
1:30 p.m. Tuesday, March 15, 2016
No. 113,434 State of Kansas v. Jacky R. Lasseter, appeal from Wyandotte County
In 2012, J.L. told her counselor that Jacky Lasseter had touched her private area in 2007 when she was 9. A jury ultimately convicted Lasseter of aggravated indecent liberties with a child under age 14. During the trial, Lasseter's attorney sought to cross-examine J.L.'s mother about why J.L. was in counseling, including about past issues of parental drug abuse and domestic violence and J.L.'s conviction for shoplifting. The district court determined that J.L.'s reasons for being in counseling were not relevant to the case and limited Lasseter's attorney from asking about them. On appeal, Lasseter argues that the district court's ruling violated his fundamental right to present a defense because his attorney was prevented from exploring J.L.'s motivation to fabricate allegations of sexual abuse. The state contends that the district court's ruling did not prevent Lasseter from establishing his theory of defense that J.L. fabricated the allegations.
2:15 p.m. Tuesday, March 15, 2016
No. 112,573 State of Kansas v. Daniel Barlett, appeal from Wyandotte County
When Daniel "Devil Boy" Barlett's musical group broke up, tensions between him and the group's cofounder, Chad "Creepy Face" Ford, ran high. One morning, people from each side of this dispute fought outside the municipal courthouse, with the altercation bubbling over into a low-speed car chase. After Barlett and a cousin joined the chase, gunfire was exchanged, and Barlett's cousin shot and killed Ford. At trial, Barlett asked that the district court instruct the jury on self-defense and add language to the instruction on aiding and abetting his cousin, but the district court denied these requests. Later, during jury deliberations, Barlett asked for a mistrial when a video failed to play correctly, but the district court determined that the playback error did not prejudice him. The jury convicted him of criminal discharge of a firearm. On appeal, Barlett argues that the district court decided the jury instruction and mistrial issues incorrectly. He also contends that the district court needed to give an additional jury instruction and that the prosecutor committed misconduct by misstating the law during closing arguments.
3 p.m. Tuesday, March 15, 2016
No. 112,589 State of Kansas v. Jamond Miller, appeal from Wyandotte County
Jamond Miller appeals his jury trial convictions for one count of aggravated robbery and one count of aggravated battery. On appeal, Miller raises two issues involving the jury instructions. First, Miller argues that the trial court failed to instruct the jury with the applicable definition of "knowingly" committing the aggravated battery. The state concedes the trial court's error but argues it was harmless. Second, Miller contends that the trial court failed to give the lesser included offense instruction of reckless aggravated battery. And finally, Miller maintains that the trial court erred in using his criminal history to increase his sentence without proving it to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt.