State v. Burns, 287 P.3d 261

Burns convicted after jury trial of multiple counts of aggravated criminal sodomy and aggravated indecent liberties with a child; sentenced to three consecutive life terms with 40-year prison enhancements.
Children described touching by Burns at Deborah’s residence; interviews conducted at Sunflower House; physical exams post-incident showed no injuries.
Jury convicted Ar.W on both indecent liberties and one sodomy count; K.W. and Av.W. each convicted on one sodomy count; other counts acquitted.
Alleged trial errors: jury-question handling, closing argument misconduct, and Allen-type instruction error; court found cumulative error requiring reversal and new trial.
Remanded for new trial; on remand, sentencing issues tied to age evidence and Jessica’s Law; some issues deemed moot due to reversal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the district court erred in answering jury questions	Burns: right to be present violated; judge’s written answer improper	Burns: Coyote framework violated; defense participation was required	Abused discretion; written answer improper and prejudicial
Prosecutorial misconduct during closing arguments	Prosecutor urged jurors to let victims know they did right thing	Statement, though improper, not gross or flagrant; evidence sufficient	Misconduct occurred but not reversible error in light of entire record
Allen-type instruction error	Instruction incorrectly stated burden and potential outcome	Error harmless under Salts; not reversible alone	Error acknowledged; contributed to cumulative error
Cumulative error denying fair trial	Combination of errors prejudiced the verdict	Common impact outweighed by strong evidence of guilt	Cumulative error reversed convictions; remanded for new trial
Alternative means/Sufficiency of evidence for alternative means (on remand)	State must prove distinct alternative means; if not, reversal	Some statutory language creates options within a means, not alternative means	Guidance provided for remand; not decisive here

State v. Coyote, 268 Kan. 726 (2000) (preservation of presence at critical stages when answering jury questions)
State v. Martinez, 290 Kan. 992 (2010) (standard for prosecutorial misconduct; plain error analysis)
State v. Ward, 292 Kan. 541 (2011) (abuse of discretion standard for jury-question responses)
State v. Murdock, 286 Kan. 661 (2008) (context for reviewing jury instructions on jury questions)
State v. Wilson, 169 Kan. 659 (1950) (general standard for reviewing jury instructions)
State v. Salts, 288 Kan. 263 (2009) (Allen-type instruction error; harmlessness considerations)
State v. Brown, 295 Kan. 181 (2012) (alternative means analysis; Brown expansion guidance)
State v. Rojas-Marceleno, 295 Kan. 525 (2012) (defining when alternatives are true alternative means vs. within means)
State v. Edwards, 291 Kan. 532 (2010) (cumulative error framework; harmless error standards)
State v. Ellmaker, 289 Kan. 1132 (2009) (cumulative error considerations)
State v. Tally, 293 Kan. 176 (2011) (harmfulness under cumulative-error standard)