BY THE COURT
right to a speedy trial guaranteed under the Sixth Amendment
to the United States Constitution and Section 10 of the
Kansas Constitution's Bill of Rights applies in
juvenile-offender proceedings under the Kansas Juvenile
Criminal charges against a juvenile offender may be refiled
in an adult proceeding after a hearing is held to determine
whether it's appropriate to do so. Once the charges are
refiled in an adult proceeding, those charges may be amended
as otherwise provided by law and are not limited only to the
charges initially brought in the juvenile-offender
statute-of-limitations defense to a criminal charge is waived
if not timely raised by the defendant in the district court.
from Johnson District Court; Sara Welch, judge.
Buck Lewis, of Topeka, for appellant.
E. Minihan, assistant district attorney, Stephen M. Howe,
district attorney, and Derek Schmidt, attorney general, for
McAnany, P.J., Pierron and Leben, JJ.
Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Section
10 of the Kansas Constitution's Bill of Rights both
guarantee the right to a speedy and public jury trial in all
criminal prosecutions. A decade ago, in In re L.M.,
286 Kan. 460, Syl. ¶ 1, 186 P.3d 164 (2008), the Kansas
Supreme Court held that juveniles had a right to a jury trial
under these provisions because juvenile-offender proceedings
had "become more akin to an adult criminal
prosecution" than to the benevolent rehabilitative
system that had once existed.
Robinson appeals his convictions for aggravated robbery and
kidnapping on the basis that his constitutional right to a
speedy trial was violated. But his case was initially filed
as a juvenile-offender proceeding, and the State argues that
no speedy-trial right exists there. We disagree: if the
jury-trial provisions in the Kansas and United States
Constitution apply, so do the speedy-trial provisions.
Because the district court in Robinson's case did not
decide his speedy-trial claim on the merits-and several
factors that must be considered need to be factually
developed-we return the case to the district court to
consider the speedy-trial claim.
also argues that the State couldn't add charges once the
case moved from juvenile to adult court and that the
State's service of the arrest warrant was so late that
the statute of limitations had expired. But a past decision
of our court and our analysis of the applicable statutory
provisions supports the conclusion that the State can amend
the charges once the case is in an adult proceeding just as
it can in other cases. And Robinson didn't raise a
statute-of-limitations defense in the district court; failing
to do so waived that potential defense.
and Procedural Background
Sunday night in September 2012, Robinson and three others
entered a home in Olathe and held the four men who resided
there at gunpoint. Robinson and his accomplices moved the men
into a bathroom, used profane language deriding the
residents' sexual identity, and ordered them to strip and
touch each other's genitals. Robinson then stole property
from the home and drove away.
the issues on appeal involve speedy-trial rights and the
movement of charges from juvenile to adult proceedings, we
will focus on the timing of the proceedings in both juvenile
and adult proceedings. Less than two weeks after the events
occurred, the State brought four charges of aggravated
robbery against Robinson, then 17, in juvenile proceedings in
the Johnson County District Court. Along with those charges,
the State moved for court authorization to prosecute Robinson
as an adult. A warrant for Robinson's arrest was issued
September 27, the same day the charges were filed.
six weeks later, the court held a status conference in the
case. Robinson wasn't there, but an appointed attorney
was. There's no indication in our record ...