State v. Diaz
241 P.3d 1018
Kan. Ct. App.2010Background
- Diaz was convicted of aggravated failure to appear after missing a December 8, 2006 pretrial conference for a felony drug possession charge and not surrendering for over 8 months.
- The offense requires willful forfeiture of an appearance bond and failure to surrender within 30 days of forfeiture under K.S.A. 21-3814(a).
- Diaz alleged he did not appear due to his attorney’s advice that a continuance would be sought, which would excuse attendance.
- Diaz learned of a warrant on December 10, 2006, but did not turn himself in; he left Kansas and eventually went to Texas and Mexico, returning after his attorney’s death.
- Gilman’s illness and death affected case handling; Diaz remained noncompliant and did not seek further contact with counsel.
- A jury found Diaz guilty; district court sentenced him to an additional 7 months; Diaz appeals on sufficiency of evidence and failure to give a mistake instruction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether evidence supported willful failure to appear | Diaz argues his mistaken belief excused nonappearance | Diaz contends his attorney’s advice created a mistake of fact | Yes; evidence showed willful nonappearance beyond reasonable doubt |
| Whether mistake-of-fact instruction was required | Diaz claims defense of mistake should have been instructed | General-intent crime: mistake not a defense | No; mistake not a defense for a general-intent crime; no instructional error |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Trautloff, 289 Kan. 793 (2009) (sufficiency review; standard for reasonable-doubt standard applied in Kansas)
- State v. Stewart, 281 Kan. 594 (2006) (discusses general vs. specific intent in Kansas crimes)
- In re C.P.W., 289 Kan. 448 (2009) (defines Kansas mental-state standards for criminal intent)
- United States v. Platte, 401 F.3d 1176 (10th Cir. 2005) (explanation of general-intent vs. specific-intent concepts)
- United States v. Iron Eyes, 367 F.3d 781 (8th Cir. 2004) (discusses mistake of fact in general-intent contexts)
- Barrera v. State, 978 S.W.2d 665 (Tex.App. 1998) (relevance of attorney advice not negating culpability)