State v. Garcia, 301 P.3d 658

Garcia was convicted of felony murder based on aggravated robbery and separately convicted of robbery.
During the bar-robbery, Vega was killed by Fernandez; Garcia allegedly participated in planning and execution.
Garcia confessed during a police interrogation; the district court denied suppression of that confession.
On appeal Garcia argues four issues: involuntary confession, opening the door for rebuttal witness, admission of gruesome photos, and cumulative errors.
The district court held Garcia’s confession voluntary; the trial proceeded with Garcia testifying in his own defense.
The court reverses and remands for a new trial, finding the confession was improperly obtained.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Was Garcia's confession involuntary?	Garcia	Garcia	Confession involuntary; suppression reversed
Did the district court err by allowing rebuttal testimony after exclusion of a witness by Garcia opening the door?	Garcia	State	Remanded for new trial; merits not decided
Were the gruesome photographs properly admitted when the cause of death was not in issue?	Garcia	State	Not decided on merits; remand controls
Did the cumulative trial errors deny Garcia a fair trial?	Garcia	State	Not decided on merits; remand controls

State v. Summers, 293 Kan. 819 (2012) (burden on state to prove voluntariness; mixed standard of review)
State v. Edwards, 291 Kan. 532 (2010) (silently supports bifurcated review in suppression)
State v. Robinson, 293 Kan. 1002 (2012) (standard for suppression; credibility not reweighed on appeal)
State v. Diaz-Ruiz, 42 Kan. App. 2d 325 (2009) (veneer of videotaped interrogation; do not invade trial court credibility)
State v. Hess, 37 Kan. App. 2d 188 (2006) (treats videotaped interrogations under same standard as in-person)
State v. Fitzgerald, 286 Kan. 1124 (2008) (limits on suppression when material facts not in dispute)