State v. Friday
297 Kan. 1023
| Kan. | 2013Background
- Deshazer died from blunt-force head injuries in his mobile home; DNA linked Friday’s clothes to the crime scene and Buffalohead’s blood matched Deshazer on a bottle and ashtray; Friday, Buffalohead, and Jones were at Deshazer’s home playing with alcohol hours before his death; testimony from Buffalohead and Jones, plus Friday’s police interview, formed the trial record; the jury convicted Friday of unintentional second-degree murder and the Court of Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prosecutorial misconduct was reversible error. | Friday argues closing comments violated bounds. | State claims error was questionable but harmless. | Harmless error; misconduct found but nonconstitutional and harmless. |
| Self-defense instruction should have been given. | Buffalohead’s testimony supported self-defense. | No imminent danger; Friday was a cooperant in mutual combat. | No self-defense instruction warranted. |
| Aiding and abetting instruction was proper. | Garza allows aiding a reckless offense. | Garza controls; aiding/abetting applicable. | Instruction proper; legally/factually supported. |
| Identical offense sentencing doctrine does not apply. | Involuntary manslaughter should have governed sentencing. | Doctrine inapplicable to severity levels; involuntary manslaughter is a lesser offense. | Doctr ine does not apply; correct to sentence under reckless second-degree murder. |
| Prior convictions may be used for criminal history without jury reproof. | Constitutional requirement to prove priors beyond reasonable doubt. | Judicial treatment consistent with prior Kansas law. | Proper; no jury reproof required. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Marshall, 294 Kan. 850 (2012) (prosecutorial misconduct factors and harmlessness analysis)
- State v. Ward, 292 Kan. 541 (2011) (constitutional and statutory harmlessness standards)
- State v. Tosh, 278 Kan. 83 (2004) (dual harmlessness standard for prosecutorial error)
- Garza v. State, 259 Kan. 826 (1996) (aider/abettor liability for recklessness or negligence)
- McCullough v. State, 293 Kan. 970 (2012) (self-defense framework and subjective/objective test)
- State v. Bridges, 297 Kan. 989 (2013) (identical offense doctrine not applicable to different penalty levels)
- State v. Cheever, 295 Kan. 229 (2012) (homicide degrees are part of felonious homicide)
- State v. Becker, 290 Kan. 842 (2010) (specific intent considerations for aiding/abetting)