criminal defendant who fails to object in district court to a
sentencing judge's reliance on facts outside the record
and who fails to argue the applicability of an exception to
preservation of the issue for appeal is prevented from having
the merits of the issue addressed.
sentencing judge who fails to explicitly bifurcate or
continue a sentencing proceeding to set restitution later
loses jurisdiction to do so.
parole eligibility time rather than a term of postrelease is
appropriate when a criminal defendant is sentenced to life in
prison for an off-grid crime.
Illegal ambiguity in the concurrent or consecutive nature of
a sentence requires correction. On the unique facts of this
case, that correction can be accomplished without remand
because the sentencing judge's intention otherwise
clearly appears in the record on appeal.
from Montgomery District Court; F. William Cullins, judge.
Tate Mann, of Kansas Appellate Defender Office, argued the
cause and was on the brief for appellant.
Natalie Chalmers, assistant solicitor general, argued the
cause, and Derek Schmidt, attorney general, was with her on
the brief for appellee.
case comes to us on direct appeal from Cameron Lee
Johnson's no contest plea to felony murder, aggravated
kidnapping, aggravated assault, and criminal possession of a
firearm. The district court sentenced Johnson to life without
parole for at least 25 years and 272 months for aggravated
kidnapping, to run consecutive to the life sentence. Johnson
raises three issues on direct appeal, concerning the
imposition of consecutive sentences, restitution, and the
imposition of lifetime postrelease supervision following a
hard-25 life sentence. We also note another ambiguity in
Johnson's sentence as pronounced.
and Procedural Background
pleaded no contest to felony murder, aggravated kidnapping,
aggravated assault, and criminal possession of a firearm. At
his plea hearing, both the district court and county attorney
referenced Johnson's numerous other criminal cases. The
district court swore Johnson in before confirming with
Johnson that he had read and understood each and every part
of the acknowledgement of rights and entry of plea that he
had signed. Johnson requested and was given additional time
to discuss the acknowledgment with his mother and his
attorney. The district court then confirmed Johnson
understood the court was not bound by the plea agreement. The
court took Johnson's no contest pleas for each of the
four offenses charged.
district court then said, "[T]he Court is aware of the
facts of the case based on the Probable Cause Affidavit, but
just to be safe, for the record, would you provide a factual
basis for the Court, please." The State did so, reciting
facts including that the victim was kidnapped when she was
taken by force or fear from the vehicle she had been in to a
vacant lot where she was shot numerous times. The State also
referenced Johnson's confession, which the district court
was familiar with from a codefendant's case. None of
these statements drew any objection from Johnson's
court responded: "Based on the information provided
by Mr. Johnson . . . and [the State, ]
the Court will find that there's a factual basis for the
plea and find that the plea was knowingly and voluntarily
entered into." (Emphasis added.) Johnson's counsel
again did not object.
sentencing, the district court handed down a Hard 25 life
sentence for felony murder; the judge made inconsistent
references to whether the sentence included the possibility
of parole after 25 years or required lifetime postrelease
"For the offense of first-degree murder, felony murder,
an off-grid offense, the Court is sentencing you to life in
prison. Lifetime post-release. That is the ...