Interpretation of a sentencing statute is a question of law
over which an appellate court exercises unlimited review.
Whether a district court has complied with the mandate of an
appellate court is a question of law over which an appellate
court has unlimited review.
Under the facts of this case, the district court on remand
erred by changing the life sentence from running concurrent
with, to consecutive to, the defendant's sentences for
his two nonvacated on-grid crimes. The court also erred by
modifying the defendant's two nonvacated, on-grid
sentences in length and sequence.
from Wyandotte District Court; Bill Klapper, judge.
E. Wells, of Jerry Wells Attorney-at-Law, of Lawrence, was on
the brief for appellant.
G. Obermeier, assistant district attorney, Mark A. Dupree
Sr., district attorney, and Derek Schmidt, attorney general,
were on the brief for appellee.
Moore challenges his resentencing by the district court after
we vacated the original hard 50 life sentence for his
premeditated first-degree murder conviction because the
sentence was unconstitutional. State v. Moore, 302
Kan. 685, 357 P.3d 275 (2015). On remand, the district court
imposed a hard 25 life sentence (lifetime sentence without
the possibility of parole for 25 years) for that conviction.
And, it changed the life sentence from concurrent with, to
consecutive to, the sentences for the convictions for
Moore's two on-grid crimes. For those crimes, the court
also changed his two nonvacated sentences in length and
conclude the district court could not resentence Moore's
two nonvacated, on-grid sentences, i.e., in length of months.
Nor could that court change them from running concurrent to
consecutive-to each other and to the hard 25. So we vacate
them and remand for resentencing. There, Moore's original
195-month and 155-month concurrent sentences for his
second-degree murder and attempted first-degree murder
convictions shall be reinstated. And they shall run
concurrent with each other and his new hard 25 sentence for
premeditated first-degree murder.
and Procedural History
Moore and his codefendant, Cedric Warren, were tried together
for the shooting deaths of Charles Ford and Larry LeDoux and
attempted shooting of Brandon Ford during an attempted
drug-house robbery. The jury convicted both Moore and Warren
of (1) premeditated first-degree murder; (2) intentional
second-degree murder; and (3) attempted premeditated
first-degree murder. The district court imposed the hard
life sentence for the off-grid first-degree premeditated
murder convictions for both Moore and Warren. For the other
two crimes, the court imposed gridbox sentences. Moore had
one prior felony conviction so his two gridbox sentences were
195 months for second-degree murder and 155 months for
attempted premeditated first-degree murder. The court also
ordered all three of Moore's sentences to run concurrent.
Warren did not have any prior convictions, his gridbox
sentences were 155 months for second-degree murder and 155
months for attempted premeditated first-degree murder. The
court also ordered all three of Warren's sentences to run
concurrent. Both Moore and Warren appealed. This court
affirmed their convictions but vacated the hard 50 sentences
because of Alleyne v. United States, 570 U.S. 99,