State v. Broxton, 461 P.3d 54

Peter Belmont was found dead from blunt-force trauma in December 2012; numerous items (including his van) were missing from his home.
Investigators recovered DNA from a bleach bottle and an orange juice bottle at the scene; results linked Broxton to the scene; other Belmont property and DNA were found in Broxton’s apartment (including a bloodstained sweatshirt).
Broxton admitted familiarity with Belmont and being in his van but denied taking property; witnesses tied Broxton to the van and to possession/sale of Belmont’s items.
Broxton was charged with first-degree premeditated murder, burglary, felony theft, and misdemeanor theft; a jury convicted him of second-degree murder, burglary, and felony theft.
Evidence at trial included a prior 1996 Florida homicide investigation that resembled Belmont’s killing and a Florida taped interview of Broxton; Florida issued a warrant but never charged Broxton. Broxton sought to admit a Florida “No Information” document indicating Florida prosecutors declined charges for lack of evidence.
At sentencing the State argued a 1989 Florida burglary conviction should be scored as a person felony; the district court so scored it and imposed sentence.

Issue	State's Argument	Broxton's Argument	Held
Whether the court erred by refusing a felony-murder jury instruction	Felony-murder instruction was legally permissible and could be given if evidence supported it	Court should give instruction because evidence suggested robbery-related death	Denied: felony murder is not a lesser included offense of charged premeditated murder; jury cannot be instructed on uncharged crimes absent lesser-included status
Whether exclusion of Florida “No Information” document was reversible error	Document was irrelevant because Florida’s charging decision did not prove innocence	Document was relevant and admissible as exculpatory evidence related to the same prior act admitted under K.S.A. 60-455	Error to exclude (document was probative), but error was harmless in light of the total evidence
Whether 1989 Florida burglary must be scored as a person felony	State: Florida burglary is comparable and may be scored as a person felony under then-applicable standards	Broxton: Florida burglary is broader than Kansas burglary and is not a comparable person felony	Vacated sentencing score: Florida burglary is not a comparable Kansas person felony; resentencing required (defendant entitled to benefit of Wetrich change while case was on direct appeal)

State v. Young, 277 Kan. 588 (2004) (addressed felony-murder instruction given though not charged; held instruction was legally incorrect under prior analysis but upheld on facts under older framework)
State v. Plummer, 295 Kan. 156 (2012) (established four-step analytical framework for reviewing jury instruction claims)
State v. Wetrich, 307 Kan. 552 (2018) (held out-of-state offense is comparable only if its elements are identical to or narrower than the Kansas offense)
State v. Weber, 309 Kan. 1203 (2019) (explained sentencing legality is fixed at sentencing; changes in law generally do not render previously legal sentences illegal)
State v. Murdock, 309 Kan. 585 (2019) (Murdock II) (held parties may obtain benefit of a change in law occurring while case is pending on direct appeal)
State v. Buell, 307 Kan. 604 (2018) (concluded Florida burglary statute is broader than Kansas burglary and therefore not comparable)
State v. Williams, 456 P.3d 540 (2020) (applied Wetrich/Wetrich-related change to grant benefit of new law during direct appeal and characterized relief as correcting a sentencing error)