BY THE COURT
a defendant is serving probation in more than one case at the
same time and a district court enters sanctions in more than
one case under the provisions of subsections (c)(1)(B),
(c)(1)(C), (c)(1)(D), or (c)(11) of K.S.A. 2016 Supp.
22-3716, the sanctions must be imposed concurrently.
the court's ruling would have no practical effect on the
parties, the case is moot. An appellate court may still
address an issue presented in a moot case if the issue is
capable of repetition in other cases and is of public
from Geary District Court; Steven L. Hornbaker, judge.
Schirer, of Kansas Appellate Defender Office, for appellant.
B. Oxford, assistant county attorney, Krista Blaisdell,
county attorney, and Derek Schmidt, attorney general, for
Malone, P.J., Leben, J., and Kevin P. Moriarty, District
Marcus William Allen was on probation in two cases, he
violated the terms of his probation. In one case, the
district court gave Allen a 60-day stay in jail as a sanction
for the violation-a sanction authorized by statute,
specifically K.S.A. 2016 Supp. 22-3716(c)(11). In a second
case, the district court gave Allen another 60-day jail term
as a sanction. And the court ordered the two sanctions be
served consecutively for a total of 120 days.
objected, noting that the neighboring section of the same
statute, K.S.A. 2016 Supp. 22-3716(c)(10), provides that
"[i]f an offender is serving multiple probation terms
concurrently, any violation sanctions imposed . . . pursuant
to subsection (c)(11), shall be imposed concurrently."
The district court overruled Allen's objection, and he
agree with Allen. These statutory provisions are quite clear.
The district court can enter a sanction of up to 60 days in
jail for a probation violation, but when the defendant is
serving more than one probation at the same time, any jail
time ordered as a sanction for violations must be ordered to
run concurrently (meaning they would all run at the same
time), not consecutively (meaning that they would be added
underlying facts behind this appeal are straightforward.
Allen pled no contest in 2013 to forgery. The district court
convicted him based on that plea and sentenced him to
probation for 18 months (with an underlying 8-month prison
term to be served if he didn't successfully complete
on probation in that case, Allen committed two new
offenses-possession of methamphetamine (a felony) and
possession of marijuana (a misdemeanor). That obviously
violated the terms of his probation; every probation includes
a requirement that the defendant obey the law while on
probation. So the district court sent Allen to jail for 30
days as a sanction for violating probation. Separately, in a
new criminal case, Allen pled guilty to the new crimes, was
convicted, and was sentenced to probation.
Allen again violated his probation. This resulted in separate
hearings-presided over by different judges-in the two ...