State v. Coman
273 P.3d 701
| Kan. | 2012Background
- Coman pleaded guilty to misdemeanor criminal sodomy under K.S.A. 21-3505(a)(1) involving a dog.
- KORA required registration only for certain listed sexually violent crimes and a catch-all provision for sexually motivated acts.
- The district court ordered Coman to register based on a finding of sexual motivation under K.S.A. 22-4902(c)(14).
- Court of Appeals affirmed; majority held catch-all could apply to unlisted sex offenses if sexually motivated.
- Supreme Court reversed, holding misdemeanor criminal sodomy is not included in catch-all for KORA registration; statutory interpretation favored defendant.
- Coman’s constitutional challenge was not properly before the court due to procedural posture and lack of standing on the specific challenge.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Coman must register under KORA for misdemeanor sodomy | Coman argues no registration for misdemeanor sodomy under KORA. | State argues catch-all or other provisions require registration. | No registration required for misdemeanor sodomy under KORA. |
| Whether catch-all K.S.A. 22-4902(c)(14) applies to unlisted crimes | Catch-all should apply to unlisted sex crimes if sexually motivated. | Catch-all should be constrained to non-sex offenses or conflicts resolved with canons. | Catch-all does not override the explicit omission of misdemeanor criminal sodomy from the per se list. |
| Whether the statutory construction permits Coman’s constitutional challenge | Constitutionality of K.S.A. 21-3505(a)(1) as applied to bestiality should be reviewed. | Coman lacks standing and procedural posture prevents review of that challenge. | Challenged constitutional issue not reached; jurisdictional/standing constraints are maintained. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 ((2003)) (struck down private homosexual conduct prohibition but cautioned narrowing of scope)
- State v. Hall, 292 Kan. 862 ((2011)) (jurisdictional rule: guilty plea without withdrawal motion deprives appellate review)
- State v. Paul, 285 Kan. 658 ((2008)) (strict construction of criminal statutes; lenity applicable when reasonable interpretations exist)
- State v. Urban, 291 Kan. 214 ((2010)) (statutory interpretation: ordinary meaning governs when plain)
- State v. Denney, 283 Kan. 781 ((2007)) (scope of appellate review over legal questions)