State v. Deal
269 P.3d 1282
| Kan. | 2012Background
- Deal was convicted of unintentional but reckless second-degree murder under K.S.A. 21-3402(b) after a July 2005 incident at Irvin’s house.
- Deal went with Montoya to Irvin’s home after Irvin allegedly harmed Deal’s girlfriend; an argument ensued and Irvin allegedly attacked Deal with a tire iron.
- Deal wrestled the tire iron away and struck Irvin twice, once in the head and once in the shoulder; Irvin died from blunt and sharp force injuries.
- The State charged premeditated first-degree murder or felony murder, later reduced to unintentional but reckless second-degree murder in exchange for Deal's testimony against Montoya.
- The jury received instructions on unintentional but reckless second-degree murder and on lesser offenses; Deal was sentenced to 168 months.
- Deal challenged sufficiency of the evidence, the “no duty to retreat” instruction, and sentencing issues under Apprendi/Johnson and Ivory.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for 21-3402(b) | Deal’s intentional blows negate unintentional but reckless murder. | K.S.A. 21-3402(b) requires unintentional killing with extreme indifference; evidence shows intent to hit Irvin. | Evidence supports unintentional but reckless murder under 21-3402(b). |
| No duty to retreat instruction | Instruction properly stated law given no duty to retreat when aggressor present. | Facts did not warrant the instruction and it could mislead the jury. | Harmless error; instruction not reversible. |
| Apprendi/Johnson sentencing issue | Aggravated sentence imposed without doce proof to jury violates Apprendi/Cunningham. | Johnson controls; grid-box sentence within presumptive range is permissible without jury finding. | Johnson controls; sentence within presumptive grid box upheld. |
| Apprendi/Ivory criminal-history sentencing issue | Use of criminal history to enhance sentence without jury proof violates Apprendi/Ivory. | Ivory precedent remains governing; no reexamination needed. | Ivory precedent controls; constitutional challenge rejected. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Robinson, 261 Kan. 865 (1997) (extreme indifference supported reckless murder finding even when initial aggressor)
- State v. Hayes, 270 Kan. 535 (2001) (distinguishes intent to kill from intent to commit act)
- State v. Pope, 23 Kan. App. 2d 69 (1996) (interpretation of intentional conduct in second-degree murder)
- State v. Johnson, 286 Kan. 824 (2008) (Apprendi/Cunningham framing for grid-based sentencing)
- State v. Ivory, 273 Kan. 44 (2002) (criminal-history computation and Apprendi implications)
- State v. Gatlin, 292 Kan. 372 (2011) (reckless standards and imminence of danger in 21-3402(b))
- State v. Tahah, 293 Kan. 267 (2011) (reckless murder and imminent danger; example of lack of specific foreseeability)
- Cordray, 277 Kan. 43 (2004) (evidence supporting recklessness when firing toward vehicle)
- Jones, 27 Kan. App. 2d 910 (2000) (reckless conduct when gun fired over crowd with eyes closed)