Supreme Court visit to Parsons
6:30 p.m.
Monday
October 3, 2022
Printable flyer
The Kansas Supreme Court is heading to Parsons High School, 3030 Morton, as part of its ongoing outreach to familiarize Kansans with the high court, its work, and the overall role of the Kansas judiciary.
It will be the Supreme Court's first visit to Parsons in the court's 161-year history, and it will be the 13th time the court will hear cases in the evening.
Oral argument and public reception
The public is invited to attend the special session to hear oral arguments in person. Court will be in session from 6:30 p.m. to about 8 p.m. Monday, October 3, 2022 in the Parsons High School auditorium.
The public is invited to observe the proceedings as the court hears oral arguments in two cases. After the session concludes, the justices will greet the public in an informal reception.
Quiet, please
Talking during oral arguments is prohibited. If you arrive after proceedings start, or you must leave the auditorium before it ends, be as quiet as possible entering and exiting. Also, do not talk immediately outside the doors to the auditorium.
Security screening
If you attend in person, plan to arrive early to allow time to get through security screening. Doors will open at 6 p.m. Follow these guidelines to make your check-in as quick and easy as possible:
-
Do not bring large bags, large purses, backpacks, computer cases, or briefcases.
-
Do not bring knives, pepper spray, firearms, or weapons.
-
Do not bring electronic devices like laptop computers, handheld games, personal digital assistants, or tablets. If you have to carry a cell phone, it must be turned off or its ringer silenced, and it must be stored out of sight.
-
Do not bring food or drink.
View oral arguments online
If you can't attend in person, the special session will also be broadcast live online at www.YouTube.com/KansasSupremeCourt.
Cases on docket
The court publishes a booklet for the special session that explains the proceedings and describes the cases.
Appeal No. 123,077: State of Kansas v. Richard I. Moler II
Counsel for Appellant: Kasper Schirer
Counsel for Appellee: Derek L. Schmidt, Lance J. Gillett
Hamilton County: (Petition for Review) A jury convicted Moler of two counts of violating the Kansas Offender Registration Act, K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 22-4901 et seq. In the Court of Appeals, Moler raised two principal challenges to his convictions. He argued the Kansas Offender Registration Act requirement to register a vehicle did not apply to him because he operated the two vehicles in question only once. He also argued the charging document referred to his prior offense as a conviction and not a juvenile adjudication. Since he stipulated only to a prior juvenile adjudication, he asserted there was insufficient evidence to support his convictions for failing to register as an offender. Moler also claimed his trial counsel was ineffective, entitling him to a new trial. The Court of Appeals affirmed his convictions.
Issues on review are whether the Court of Appeals erred in finding: 1) there was sufficient evidence for a conviction because Moler was not required by law to register vehicles he drove only one time; and 2) there was sufficient evidence when the State charged that Moler's registration obligation arose from a prior conviction, but it in fact arose from a prior juvenile adjudication.
Appeal No. 120,566: State of Kansas (appellee) v. Justin Burket Eckert (appellant)
Attorney for Appellant: Kai Tate Mann
Attorney for Appellee: Derek L. Schmidt, Elizabeth Sweeney-Reeder
Miami County: (Cross-Petition for Review; Conditional Cross-Petition for Review to State's Cross-Petition) A jury convicted Eckert of aggravated kidnapping, aggravated battery, aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, criminal threat, cultivation of marijuana, and 25 counts of possession of drug paraphernalia. In his direct appeal to the Court of Appeals, he argued: 1) there was insufficient evidence to support his aggravated kidnapping conviction; 2) his 25 convictions for possession of drug paraphernalia were multiplicitous; 3) there was insufficient evidence to support two of his possession of drug paraphernalia convictions; 4) the district court erred in failing to give a voluntary intoxication instruction; 5) cumulative error denied him a fair trial; 6) his criminal restitution judgment is unconstitutional under Section 5 of the Kansas Constitution Bill of Rights and the Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution; and 7) the district court imposition of a no-contact order together with his prison sentence constitutes an illegal sentence. The Court of Appeals agreed with Eckert that his possession of drug paraphernalia convictions were multiplicitous and the no-contact order was an illegal sentence, but otherwise affirmed the district court judgment. Both parties petitioned the Supreme Court for review. The Supreme Court granted the State's cross-petition and Eckert's conditional cross-petition.
Issues on review are whether: 1) the Court of Appeals erred in finding Eckert’s drug paraphernalia convictions were multiplicitous; and 2) there was sufficient evidence to support Eckert’s conviction involving the use of propane and a blower attached to the propane tank as drug paraphernalia.
Travel docket history
In 2011, the Supreme Court convened outside its Topeka courtroom in the Kansas Judicial Center to mark the state's 150th anniversary. Its first stop was the historic Supreme Court courtroom in the Kansas Statehouse. From there, and through the end of 2011, the court conducted special sessions in Salina, Greensburg, and Wichita. Since then, the court has held special sessions as follows:
2012: Overland Park
2013: Pittsburg
2014: Kansas City
2015: Hays and Garden City
2016: Topeka, Hiawatha, and Hutchinson
2017: Winfield and Emporia
2018: Colby and Manhattan
2019: Lawrence and El Dorado
2020-21: Travel docket suspended due to COVID pandemic.
2022: Great Bend