State v. Haberlein
290 P.3d 640
| Kan. | 2012Background
- Haberlein convicted of first‑degree premeditated murder, aggravated kidnapping, and aggravated robbery in Bonner Springs Dollar General case (Nov. 2005 death of Robin Bell).
- State relied on accomplices’ and A.R.’s testimony; no physical murder weapon tied Haberlein; videotaped statements and letters admitted.
- District judge failed to sua sponte instruct on second‑degree intentional murder; Haberlein challenged adult certification as an adult without jury fact‑finding.
- Sentences: hard 50 life sentence for murder, plus 312 months for other offenses, consecutive.
- Defense claimed inadequate instruction and constitutional challenges; majority affirms conviction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Failure to instruct on second‑degree murder | Haberlein | Haberlein | Instruction error found; harmless eventual impact uncertain |
| Alternative means for aggravated kidnapping | State | Haberlein | Force, threat, deception are not independent alternative means; flight/ crime facilitation are within means; no reversal |
| Aggravated robbery instruction broader than information | Haberlein | Haberlein | Broader phrasing permissible; not clearly erroneous given charged theory |
| Adult certification without jury determination | Haberlein | Haberlein | Rule raised for first time; court declines to address constitutional novelty |
| Constitutionality of hard 50 sentencing scheme and cumulative error | Haberlein | Hard 50 unconstitutional; cumulative error warranted reversal | No plain error found; cumulative error not established; hard 50 not reconsidered on appeal |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Plummer, 295 Kan. 156 (Kan. 2012) (framework for review of lesser‑included offense instructions; burden on defendant for clear error)
- State v. Williams, 295 Kan. 506 (Kan. 2012) (standard for reversal on instruction error; harmless beyond reasonable doubt)
- State v. Morton, 283 Kan. 464 (Kan. 2007) (premeditation may be inferred from circumstances)
- State v. Brown, 295 Kan. 181 (Kan. 2012) (analyzes whether statute creates alternative means; Brown governs interpretation of or in statute)
- State v. Scaife, 286 Kan. 614 (Kan. 2008) (premeditation framework and lesser included offenses; relevant to instruction issues)
- State v. Timley, 255 Kan. 286 (Kan. 1994) (sufficiency of evidence for alternative means under earlier standard)
- State v. Wright, 290 Kan. 194 (Kan. 2010) (require proof of each alternative means under certain descriptions; guides Brown framework)