TOPEKA—A three-judge panel of the Kansas Court of Appeals will hear oral arguments at 9 a.m. Tuesday, October 17, at Hugoton Middle School, and at 9 a.m. Wednesday, October 18, at Keply Middle School in Ulysses.
The hearings will take place in the school auditoriums in both locations before an audience of area high school students. The public is invited to attend as well.
Hugoton Middle School is at 115 W 11th Street in Hugoton. Keply Middle School is at 113 N Colorado Street in Ulysses.
Judge Kim Schroeder, the presiding judge, will be joined by Judge Patrick McAnany and Judge Anthony Powell to hear oral arguments in eight cases over the two days.
"I want to thank Chief Judge Bradley Ambrosier, and District Court Judges Clinton Peterson and Linda Gilmore, for helping arrange this setting for the Court of Appeals," Schroeder said. "I also want to thank Adrian Howe, superintendent in Hugoton USD 210, and David Younger, superintendent in Ulysses USD 214, for letting us use their facilities for our court's first-time visit to these communities. We look forward to visiting with students and area residents during our visit."
After oral arguments conclude each day, the judges will talk to students and the public and answer their questions about Kansas' system of fair and impartial courts. However, the judges will not answer questions about the cases they will have just heard.
Nearly every month, panels of the Court of Appeals judges hear cases in Wichita, Topeka, and Kansas City. On occasion, panels visit other parts of the state, like Hugoton and Ulysses, to make the court accessible to the people of Kansas.
In addition to making the court accessible, hearing cases around the state saves money for the parties because they don't have to travel as far.
Oral Arguments
Attorneys for each side will have an opportunity to present arguments to the judges, and the judges will have a chance to ask questions. The court will then take each case under consideration and will issue a written decision at a later date, usually within 60 days.
The appeals to be heard in Hugoton arose in Ford, Wallace, Hamilton, and Finney counties. The appeals to be heard in Ulysses arose in Finney, Ford, and Seward counties.
In addition to the hearings this week in Hugoton and Ulysses, other three-judge panels of the Court of Appeals will hear cases in Kansas City, Wichita and Topeka. All hearings are open to the public.
There are 14 judges on the Court of Appeals, and the judges sit in three-judge panels to decide cases. In 2016, the Court of Appeals resolved appeals in 1,932 cases, including 1,304 in which the court issued a formal opinion.
9 a.m. Tuesday, October 17, 2017
Hugoton Middle School Auditorium
Appeal No. 116,816: Isidro Munoz v. Maria Lupercio
Ford County: Munoz filed a civil negligence suit against Lupercio after they were involved in a car accident. Lupercio admitted 100 percent fault for the accident. Munoz claimed he suffered bodily injury, and he sought damages from Lupercio. Before trial, Lupercio asked the court for an order to exclude the bulk of Munoz' evidence about his medical treatment and bills on the basis that Munoz failed to establish a proper foundation for the admission of the evidence. The district court granted Lupercio's motion and excluded the evidence. After a bench trial, Munoz was awarded $387.32 for property damage, but no damages were awarded for his medical damages. Munoz appeals, arguing that the evidence of his medical treatment and bills was improperly excluded.
Appeal No. 116,194: Lyle M. Hammer, d/b/a HammerHead Supply v. Brent Meranda
Wallace County: This case arises from a contract dispute between Hammer and Meranda. Hammer alleges he sold and delivered 50 bags of corn seed to Meranda in 2012. He claims Meranda did not pay him for the seed despite sending several invoices and repeated attempts to contact him by phone and in person. Meranda denied buying or receiving any seed. Hammer sued Meranda and the district court found in Hammer's favor, awarding him payment for 50 bags of seed plus interest. On appeal, Meranda argues the: district court's decision was not supported by the evidence presented at trial; district court awarded interest in excess of the amount allowed by Kansas statute; district court improperly granted Hammer prejudgment interest; and district court erred in denying his motion for a new trial.
Appeal No. 116,578: Christina Bonnette v. Triple D Auto Parts, Inc.
Hamilton County: This case is about a woman who fell down when she left an auto parts store. Bonnette made a purchase in the store and then fell down as she was exiting the building. The building has a step that is narrow and hard to see. The first question in the case is whether her claim is barred by the statute of repose. The statute generally bars claims that arise more than 10 years after the act giving rise to the claim. Here, the building was built in 1925, and Triple D Auto Parts claims the statute of repose applies since they bought the building in 1990 and Bonnette had been going to the store to purchase items for the last 16 years, at least five times a year. The second issue is whether the store had a duty to warn Bonnette of the dangerous step as a patron of the business, even though the building was built in 1925 and no changes have been made to the front steps entering the store.
Appeal No. 115,971: City of Garden City, Kansas v. Jose Quinonez-Rangel
Finney County: In municipal court, Quinonez-Rangel was convicted of violating City of Garden City Ordinance 86-2(192), which prohibits driving without a license. The district court affirmed his conviction. On appeal, Quinonez-Rangel argues City Ordinance 86-2(192) — which also increases the minimum penalty based on the number of prior convictions for similar violations — is unconstitutional and unenforceable because it does not resemble the statute it is derived from. In addition, he argues that K.S.A. 2016 Supp. 8-235 is not in substantial conformity with the ordinance and a conviction for a violation of K.S.A. 2016 Supp. 8-235 cannot be a prior conviction under the language of the ordinance.
9 a.m. Wednesday, October 18, 2017
Keply Middle School Auditorium
Appeal No. 116,211: State of Kansas v. Cho My Ya
Finney County: Ya appeals her conviction of nine crimes. Ya says that the State broke its promise under the parties' written plea agreement. The State agreed it would tell the district court that Ya should serve a sentence less than or equal to 25 years with the Department of Corrections or in prison. But later at the sentencing hearing, the State told the district court that it should sentence Ya to 28 and three-quarters years in prison. Ya now appeals and asks the Court of Appeals to determine if the State broke its promise under the plea agreement. The second issue involves whether the district court abused its discretion when it denied her request for less time than the State requested or to be placed on probation and not sent to prison.
Appeal No. 116,048: State of Kansas v. Samuel Mich White
Finney County: During a surprise home visit, White's probation officer discovered White's two children were locked in their bedroom up to 14 hours a day. The State charged White with two counts of child abuse or, in the alternative, aggravated endangerment of a child. At trial, White's wife testified she locked the children in their room when she went to bed between 10 and 11 p.m. White unlocked the room when he got up, which was usually between 12 and 12:30 p.m. The State presented evidence showing there were choking hazards in the children's room, and that there was no food or water for the children in their room. The jury convicted White of two counts of aggravated endangerment of a child. On appeal, White argues there was insufficient evidence to convict him of aggravated endangerment of a child because the State presented no evidence the children were actually endangered. He also contends the district court erred when instructed the jury on the defense of parental discipline because the defense applies in cases of corporal punishment and there was no evidence he used force on his children. White asserts aggravated endangerment of a child is an alternative means crime and the district court failed to give a unanimity instruction. Finally, he argues the district court's instruction on aggravated endangerment of a child was clearly erroneous because it failed to set forth an element of one of the alternative means.
Appeal No. 115,941: State of Kansas v. Miguel Angel Gonzalez
Ford County: Gonzalez was convicted by a jury of one count of aggravated criminal sodomy of a child under 14 years of age, an off-grid felony. Under Jessica's Law, Gonzalez faced a presumptive sentence of life imprisonment with no possibility of parole for 25 years. Prior to sentencing, Gonzalez requested that the sentencing court grant a durational departure to the sentencing grid for his offense. The district court granted Gonzalez' motion for a downward departure and sentenced him to 203-month prison sentence, followed by lifetime postrelease supervision. The State appeals the district court's decision to grant Gonzalez a departure sentence from a Jessica's Law sentence, arguing the court abused its discretion by failing to follow the proper statutory method in granting the departure motion. Gonzalez filed a cross-appeal from his conviction and sentence. He argues the: district court erred by refusing to hold a preliminary hearing after the charges were amended; district court erred by refusing to dismiss the State's amended information; and imposition of postrelease lifetime supervision is an illegal sentence.
Appeal No. 116,030: State of Kansas v. Julio Xan Saquic
Seward County: On January 24, 2015, Jose Ramos was run over and killed by a vehicle operated by Saquic. The State charged Saquic with involuntary manslaughter while driving under the influence of alcohol; failing to stop and remain at the scene of an accident resulting in death; driving without a driver's license; and driving under the influence of alcohol. A jury found Saquic guilty of all charges. At sentencing, the court dismissed the conviction for driving under the influence of alcohol for being multiplicitous with Saquic's involuntary manslaughter conviction. Saquic appeals his conviction.
The panel will also consider 10 other cases that are not set for oral argument. To learn more about the Court of Appeals, visit www.kscourts.org.