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. Brook

Supreme Court of Kansas

May 10, 2019

State of Kansas, Appellee,
v.
Skyler Lee Brook, Appellant.

         SYLLABUS

         1. Imposition of an underlying prison term after a probation violation is not equivalent to "incarceration for a supervision violation" under K.S.A. 2018 Supp. 22-3717(d)(3). The period of a person's postrelease supervision term may be modified while the person is serving his or her underlying prison sentence after probation revocation without running afoul of K.S.A. 2018 Supp. 22-3717(d)(3).

         2. K.S.A. 2013 Supp. 22-3717(d)(1)(D) applies only to persons convicted of a sexually violent crime on or after July 1, 1993, but before July 1, 2006. K.S.A. 2013 Supp. 22-3717(d)(1)(G) applies to persons convicted of a sexually violent crime on or after July 1, 2006. There are no persons convicted of a sexually violent crime to whom both subparagraph K.S.A. 2013 Supp. 22-3717(d)(1)(D) and subparagraph (d)(1)(G) apply.

          Review of the judgment of the Court of Appeals in an unpublished opinion filed April 28, 2017.

          Appeal from Nemaha District Court; John L. Weingart, judge.

          Peter Maharry, of Kansas Appellate Defender Office, was on the briefs for appellant.

          Brad M. Lippert, county attorney, and Derek Schmidt, attorney general, were on the brief for appellee.

          OPINION

          BEIER, J.

         Defendant Skyler Lee Brook appeals the district court's correction of his postrelease supervision term after his probation was revoked and he was ordered to serve his original sentence. He challenges the district court judge's statutory authority to change the term from two years to lifetime, and he argues the lifetime postrelease term constitutes cruel and unusual punishment.

         We affirm the district judge's decision and our Court of Appeals' endorsement of it.

         FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

         Brook pleaded no contest to sexual exploitation of a child as a result of interactions with C.B. between May 6 and May 20, 2013. Brook was 22 years old at the time. He was sentenced to 36 months in prison and 2 years of postrelease supervision. The district court judge suspended imposition of Brook's sentence and ordered Brook to serve 36 months' probation.

         Brook committed another crime, which resulted in revocation of his probation and imposition of his original sentence in this case.

         The Department of Corrections notified the court that Brook should have received a lifetime postrelease term because of his plea to a sexually violent crime. The district judge agreed that this portion of Brook's sentence ...


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.