State v. Bennett., 347 P.3d 229

Background

Jennifer Bennett pled no contest to second-degree murder under a plea agreement that reduced an original off-grid first-degree murder charge and specified an agreed upward durational departure sentence of 300 months and a waiver of the right to appeal that sentence.
plea documents were signed by Bennett, defense counsel, and the prosecutor; at the plea hearing the court advised Bennett of jury-trial rights and confirmed she waived appeal of any sentence up to 300 months (but retained the right to appeal any sentence >300 months).
Neither the plea colloquy nor the plea documents advised Bennett of her separate constitutional right to have aggravating factors for an upward durational departure submitted to a jury and proved beyond a reasonable doubt, nor did Bennett expressly waive that right.
At sentencing a different judge found aggravating factors (intentional striking with a car causing death) and imposed the agreed 300-month upward durational departure based on judicial factfinding; the sentencing judge nonetheless told Bennett she had a right to appeal her sentence within 14 days.
Bennett timely appealed, arguing the departure sentence was unconstitutionally imposed because the aggravating factors were not submitted to a jury and she did not knowingly waive that jury right. The State argued Bennett waived her right to appeal the sentence.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Bennett)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
Whether an upward durational departure may be imposed by judicial factfinding absent an express waiver of the right to a jury determination of aggravating factors	The district court unconstitutionally imposed the departure by finding aggravating facts without a jury; she never waived the jury right	Sentence waiver in the plea agreement bars appellate review of the sentence	Court: Judicial factfinding for the departure violated Apprendi and Kansas law because Bennett had not waived the departure jury; the sentence is illegal and vacated
Whether Bennett's written and oral sentence-appeal waiver deprives the court of jurisdiction to review the alleged unconstitutional sentencing procedure	The appeal contests the constitutionality of the sentencing procedure (not merely the agreed sentence); waiver does not cover appeals challenging constitutionality of how the sentence was imposed	Waiver of appeal of the 300-month sentence is knowing and bars review	Court: Waiver does not bar review of an illegal/unconstitutional sentencing procedure; court has jurisdiction
Whether Bennett knowingly and voluntarily waived the right to appeal an unconstitutionally imposed sentence	She could not knowingly waive the right because plea documents and colloquy did not explain that departure factors must be jury-determined; there was no meeting of the minds on that right	The plea colloquy and documents show Bennett knowingly waived appeal of a 300-month sentence	Court: The plea agreement was ambiguous on appeal waiver and insufficient to show Bennett intentionally relinquished the known right to a departure-factor jury; waiver unenforceable as to this constitutional claim
Remedy for sentencing error when departure jury waiver was not obtained	Vacatur of the unlawful departure sentence and remand for resentencing without upward durational departure unless proper waiver or jury proceeding occurs	(State did not contest remedy)	Court: Vacated the 300-month upward durational departure and remanded for resentencing consistent with constitutional/jury requirements

Key Cases Cited

Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000) (facts that increase prescribed sentence beyond statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury and proved beyond a reasonable doubt)
Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 (2004) (Apprendi principles apply to state sentencing schemes and permit waiver but require knowing, voluntary waivers)
State v. Duncan, 291 Kan. 467 (2011) (failure to obtain express waiver of departure jury precludes judicial factfinding for upward durational departure; illegal sentence vacated)
State v. Horn, 291 Kan. 1 (2011) (same principle: invalid waiver of departure jury bars court-conducted upward departure)
State v. Patton, 287 Kan. 200 (2008) (a valid, knowing, voluntary waiver of appellate rights is generally enforceable; courts examine plea/sentencing record for clarity)
State v. Copes, 290 Kan. 209 (2010) (plea waivers are contracts requiring a meeting of the minds; unknown rights not knowingly waived)
State v. Wills, 244 Kan. 62 (1988) (ambiguous plea agreements must be strictly construed in favor of the defendant)