State v. Scaife, 286 Kan. 614

Summary

The Supreme Court of Kansas held that sufficient circumstantial evidence supported the premeditation element of the first-degree murder conviction, but the trial court erred by refusing to instruct the jury on second-degree murder. The court reversed the premeditated first-degree murder conviction and remanded for a new trial, affirmed the remaining convictions and sentences, vacated the assessment of BIDS attorney fees for lack of required findings, and rejected the challenges concerning prosecutorial argument, the BIDS application fee, and use of criminal history at sentencing.

Holdings

1. The evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the prosecution, was sufficient for a rational jury to infer that Scaife had thought about killing the victims beforehand and acted with premeditated intent.
2. When evidence viewed in the light most favorable to the defendant would reasonably justify a conviction for second-degree intentional murder and does not exclude that theory, the defendant is entitled to a requested lesser included offense instruction. The trial court therefore erred by refusing to instruct on second-degree murder for Thompson's killing.
3. The prosecutor's closing arguments concerning Ross's 911 call, demeanor, consistency, and credibility were permissible arguments based on reasonable inferences from the evidence and did not constitute improper personal vouching or prosecutorial misconduct.
4. A sentencing court may not impose reimbursement of appointed-counsel fees without making explicit findings concerning the defendant's financial resources and the burden that payment would impose. The attorney-fee assessment was therefore vacated and remanded.
5. The sentencing journal entry did not improperly deviate from the oral pronouncement by including the unpaid BIDS application fee, because the obligation arose when Scaife applied for appointed counsel and the sentencing court's assessment of costs encompassed that previously ordered fee.
6. The sentencing court's use of Scaife's prior convictions and juvenile adjudications without jury findings did not violate Apprendi under controlling Kansas precedent.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient to support the premeditation element of the first-degree murder and attempted first-degree murder convictions.
2. Whether the trial court was required to instruct the jury on second-degree murder as a lesser included offense of premeditated first-degree murder.
3. Whether the prosecutor improperly vouched for Ross's credibility during closing argument.
4. Whether the sentencing court could order reimbursement of BIDS attorney fees without considering Scaife's financial resources and the burden of payment.
5. Whether the sentencing journal entry improperly added the BIDS application fee when the sentencing judge did not expressly pronounce it at sentencing.
6. Whether use of prior convictions and juvenile adjudications to increase Scaife's sentence violated Apprendi.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded