Appeal No. 121,951: State of Kansas v. Ronald Johnson

Summary calendar; no oral argument

Appeal No. 122,281: State of Kansas v. Benjamin A. Appleby

Summary calendar; no oral argument

Appeal No. 122,293: State of Kansas v. Christopher M. Trotter

Summary calendar; no oral argument

Johnson, Appleby, and Trotter each challenged the sentence imposed for his first-degree premeditated or capital murder conviction. The Kansas Supreme Court rejected their arguments that K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 21-6628 provides an avenue or independent means to attack a hard-50 sentence and affirmed the lower court decisions denying each relief. Johnson's and Trotter's cases originated in Wyandotte County. Appleby's case originated in Johnson County.

Appeal No. 119,529: State of Kansas v. Luis Antonio Aguirre

Archived oral argument video
The Kansas Supreme Court affirmed the decision of Riley County District Court after Aguirre appealed his convictions for first-degree premeditated murder and voluntary manslaughter. A majority of the Supreme Court determined Aguirre's statements to law enforcement were voluntary. The Supreme Court also unanimously concluded: the district court committed harmless error in admitting expert testimony concerning the length of time a grave had been open; Aguirre's conviction for first-degree premeditated murder was supported by sufficient evidence; the parties' previous stipulation to the authenticity of certain emails made during Aguirre's first trial was also binding on his second trial; the district court did not err in refusing to issue a requested jury instruction on inference stacking; the prosecutor did not err during closing arguments; the district court had jurisdiction to convict Aguirre of two lesser included offenses despite the fact he was charged with only a single count of capital murder; and there was no cumulative error.

Appeal No. 121,685: State of Kansas v. Carlos Antonio Gallegos

Archived oral argument video

The Kansas Supreme Court affirmed Gallegos’ conviction for first-degree premeditated murder. Gallegos appealed his conviction, arguing Wyandotte County District Court had erred by declining to give jury instructions on voluntary manslaughter and voluntary intoxication. Gallegos also argued the State committed prosecutorial error in closing arguments. The Supreme Court found no error occurred.

Appeal No. 118,035: Jayhawk Racing Properties LLC and Heartland Park Raceway LLC v. City of Topeka, Kansas

Archived oral argument video
 The City of Topeka entered into an agreement with private owners to assume full ownership of a motor speedway, the rights to which would be paid through Sales Tax and Revenue (STAR) bonds. The City subsequently decided not to fulfill the terms of the agreement. The private owners filed suit seeking damages for breach of contract. Holding the agreement was an exercise of a governmental function and not binding on successive city councils, Shawnee County District Court granted the City's motion to dismiss. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding the agreement was an exercise of an administrative function, and remanded for proceedings on the breach of contract action. The Kansas Supreme Court granted review. Writing for the court, Justice Eric Rosen affirmed the district court and reversed the Court of Appeals. The court held city revenue projects may be divided into two categories: projects that serve a governmental or legislative function, and projects that serve a proprietary or administrative function. The development, introduction, or improvement of services are, by and large, considered governmental, and the power to levee a tax generally belongs to the class of governmental power. One city council may not bind a subsequent one to its political decisions involving the exercise of government functions, so the new city council was not obligated to carry out the terms of the agreement. Justice Caleb Stegall wrote a concurring opinion in which he questioned the ongoing validity and viability of the legal distinction between governmental and proprietary municipal functions.

Appeal No. 118,379: Hugh Michael Hawkins v. Southwest Kansas Co-op Service and Travelers Indemnity Co.

Archived oral argument video
The Kansas Supreme Court upheld the Workers Compensation Board's allocation of settlement proceeds between Hawkins and his employer, Southwest Kansas Co-op. Hawkins was severely injured in a workplace crane collapse, and Southwest paid him workers compensation benefits. Hawkins then sued various entities responsible for the crane and obtained settlements. A jury trial against the remaining entity resulted in the jury finding Southwest 25% at fault for Hawkins' injuries and allocating the remaining fault to a party he had already settled with. Southwest asserted its statutory subrogation interest against the settlement proceeds. In a unanimous decision written by Justice Dan Biles, the Supreme Court held the subrogation interest should be reduced by Southwest's percentage of fault, even though the jury's verdict was rendered after the settlement it seeks to recover from, and that, having done so, the Workers Compensation Board properly calculated the subrogation interest.

Appeal No. 121,467: State of Kansas v. Aaron David Cash

Archived oral argument video
The Kansas Supreme Court upheld Johnson County District Court's denial of Cash's motion to suppress certain drug evidence seized during a traffic stop. Cash was stopped for not having a license plate decal. Cash told the officer the vehicle belonged to a friend. While Cash searched for registration and insurance documents, the officer noticed a plastic bag and a Crown Royal bag hanging out of a partially opened safe on the rear floorboard. The officer could not see into either bag, so she asked Cash to open it. Cash complied, and the officer saw drug paraphernalia in the plastic bag. Cash also said there was a pipe inside the safe. The officer then searched the vehicle and found drugs inside the safe and elsewhere in the vehicle. Cash filed a motion to suppress the evidence seized in the search, arguing the officer lacked the requisite reasonable suspicion to extend the traffic stop to ask him questions about the safe and the bags. The district court denied the motion, finding the officer had reasonable suspicion to extend the stop. Cash was convicted at a bench trial. On appeal, a majority panel of the Court of Appeals affirmed the ruling, but one judge dissented and wrote the officer's limited subjective experience combined with the presence of the bags did not give rise to reasonable suspicion. In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals’ majority panel's findings. It specifically held the officer's subjective experience with these kinds of investigations was irrelevant. In looking at the totality of the circumstances, an objective standard from the standpoint of a trained law enforcement officer, the presence of the bags and the safe presented a particularized and objective basis for suspecting Cash was engaged in illicit activity.

Appeal No. 122,685: In the Matter of A.B.

Archived oral argument video

The Kansas Supreme Court reversed Clay County District Court's decision that determined the aggravated indecent liberties with a child statute, K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 21-5506(b)(1), unconstitutionally vague, overbroad, and in violation of the Equal Protection Clause to the U.S. Constitution. The State had charged a then 14-year-old girl for having sexual relations with a then 14-year-old boy, who was a few months older than the girl. The State charged the girl with aggravated indecent liberties with a child instead of the Romeo and Juliet statute, K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 21-5507, a less severe crime. The state cited In re E.R., 40 Kan. App. 2d 986, 197 P.3d 870 (2008), which held individuals charged under the Romeo and Juliet statute must be "under age 19 and older than the child by some period less than 4 years" to be adjudicated a juvenile offender. In an opinion written by Justice Dan Biles, the court overruled E.R. The Supreme Court concluded the Court of Appeals holding in E.R. incorrectly interpreted the Romeo and Juliet law since the statute's plain language does not require the offender be older than the other juvenile.

Appeal No. 121,936: In the Matter of the Wrongful Conviction of M.M.

Archived oral argument video
On direct appeal, the Kansas Supreme Court affirmed Clay County District Court's decision granting the State's motion to dismiss M.M.'s Petition for Certificate of Innocence under K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 60-5004. In an opinion written by Justice Caleb Stegall, the court held the statute's unambiguous plain language bars claimants from recovering for wrongful juvenile adjudications because they are not criminal convictions.

Appeal No. 120,028: State of Kansas v. James L. Thornton

Summary calendar, no oral argument

The Kansas Supreme Court upheld Thornton's convictions in Douglas County District Court for possession of illegal drugs and drug paraphernalia. After a short pursuit, Thornton was stopped by Lawrence police for failing to have headlamps on his bicycle. Officers discovered a syringe in Thornton's backpack, a glass pipe on his person, and a bag containing narcotics along the path of the pursuit. On appeal, the State conceded the backpack search was illegal and the syringe should have been excluded from the case. The Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions, holding Thornton waived any argument the syringe's use at trial prejudiced him. In a unanimous opinion written by Justice Dan Biles, the Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' decision as right for the wrong reason. The Court of Appeals should have addressed whether the improper use of the evidence prejudiced Thornton under its caselaw requiring the State to show lack of prejudice when it benefits from an error. But the Supreme Court addressed the issue itself, concluding the error was harmless given the trial evidence other than the syringe supporting the convictions.