Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Reed

Court of Appeals of Kansas

January 16, 2015

STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee,
v.
IRA L. REED, Appellant

Page 617

[Copyrighted Material Omitted]

Page 618

Appeal from Butler District Court; MICHAEL E.WARD, judge.

SYLLABUS

BY THE COURT

1. Individuals convicted of sexually violent crimes pursuant to K.S.A. 2013 Supp. 22-3717(d)(5) are subject to lifetime postrelease supervision under K.S.A. 2013 Supp. 22-3717(d)(1)(G).

2. The Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which is applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, provides: " Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted." Section 9 of the Kansas Constitution Bill of Rights contains similar protections. The concept of proportionality is central to the Eighth Amendment. Embodied in the Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishments is the precept of justice that punishment for crime should be graduated and proportioned to the offense.

3. A categorical proportionality analysis under the Eighth Amendment does not require a review of the district court's factual findings. Instead, only questions of law are implicated. There are three subcategories of categorical proportionality challenges: first, those concerning the nature of the offense; second, those concerning the characteristics of the offender; and third, a combination of the first two.

4. There is a two-prong test used to evaluate a defendant's categorical proportionality challenge to a sentence. The court first considers objective indicia of society's standards, as expressed in legislative enactments and state practice to determine whether there is a national consensus against the sentencing practice at issue. Next, guided by the standards elaborated by controlling precedents and by the court's own understanding and interpretation of the Eighth Amendment's text, history, meaning, and purpose, the court must determine in the exercise of its own independent judgment whether the punishment in question violates the Constitution.

5. To successfully challenge a sentence as categorically disproportionate, a defendant must show that, based on the characteristics of the class of offender to which the defendant belongs and the nature of the offense at issue, the sentencing practice is disproportionate with the offender's culpability.

6. The " attempt" nature of a conviction does not remove it from the general category of sexually violent crimes subject to lifetime postrelease supervision.

7. Lifetime postrelease supervision as applied to first time offenders serves legitimate penological goals because supervised release meets the same rehabilitative and deterrent objectives as it does for repeat offenders.

8. Offenders who are guilty of attempting to commit a crime still have the intent required to commit it, so the penological objectives for lifetime postrelease supervision are the same as for those offenders who completed a crime.

9. The goals of rehabilitation and incapacitation, in particular, are served by the imposition of lifetime postrelease supervision, given the propensity of sex offenders to reoffend. Individuals on postrelease supervision for a sex crime conviction are typically required to receive sex offender treatment, which serves an important rehabilitative component, and supervision keeps sex ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.