State v. Harsh, 265 P.3d 1161

John Harsh pled nolo contendere to one count of rape of a girl under 14, an off-grid offense under 21-3502(a)(2).
Harsh sought a downward departure under Jessica’s Law (21-4643) to a 258-month term; district court denied and imposed life with a mandatory minimum of 586 months and lifetime postrelease supervision.
The State and defense presented mitigating and aggravating factors; the district court reviewed these and denied departure.
On appeal, Harsh challenged both the departure denial and the lifetime postrelease supervision requirement.
The court affirmed denial of the departure motion but vacated the lifetime postrelease supervision portion of the sentence, holding it was statutorily improper.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the district court abused discretion in denying departure	Harsh contends mitigating factors warranted substantial and compelling reasons.	State argues mitigating factors insufficient to depart.	No abuse; substantial reasons not shown.
Whether lifetime postrelease supervision was properly imposed	Harsh argues the court erred in applying postrelease supervision instead of parole.	State contends statutes allowed postrelease supervision in the off-grid context.	Lifetime postrelease supervision vacated; parole required instead.
Whether the court’s analysis complied with statutory departure framework	Harsh asserts factors should cumulatively justify departure.	State maintains factors do not collectively meet substantial and compelling standards.	Court did not abuse discretion; factors insufficient.

State v. Spencer, 291 Kan. 796 (2011) (standard for substantial and compelling reasons to depart)
State v. Ward, 292 Kan. 541 (2011) (abuse of discretion includes errors of law or fact)
State v. Plotner, 290 Kan. 774 (2010) (procedure for reviewing departures; specificity not mandatory)
State v. Ballard, 289 Kan. 1000 (2009) (departure framework for off-grid sentences; factors weighed collectively)
State v. Seward, 289 Kan. 715 (2009) (recognizes discretion in weighing mitigating factors)