State v. Hart
297 Kan. 494
| Kan. | 2013Background
- Hart was convicted by jury of two counts of indecent liberties with a child.
- Appeals court affirmed; Hart sought Supreme Court review; issue centered on 60-455 prior bad acts evidence and amendments.
- District court admitted prior uncharged acts against C.H. and N.B.; 4-year-old K.H. evidence deemed inflammatory and largely excluded.
- Trial included testimonies from C.H. and N.B., with defense highlighting admissibility and potential prejudice of prior acts.
- State amended counts from aggravated indecent liberties to indecent liberties; district court gave limiting instruction on 60-455 evidence.
- Supreme Court affirmed Hart’s convictions and sentences, rejected claims of prosecutorial misconduct, instruction error, and evidentiary reversible error.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prosecutorial misconduct in closing | Hart asserts statements improperly vouched for credibility of C.H. | State contends remarks were within prosecutorial latitude and not reversible. | Harmless error; convictions affirmed. |
| Overbreadth of elements instruction | Instruction was broader than charging document; prejudicially misled jurors. | Error not clearly erroneous; defense did not object to wording; defense not prejudiced. | Not clearly erroneous; no reversal. |
| Admission of K.S.A. 60-455 evidence (pre-2009 version) | Uncharged acts admissible to prove motive, intent, plan, etc.; inclination evidence admissible. | Inclination evidence improper propensity proof under pre-2009 statute; limited by other purposes. | Admission error but harmless; not reversible. |
| Limiting instruction adequacy for 60-455 evidence | Instruction should define each 60-455 factor; failure prejudicial. | Definitions not required; instruction not clearly erroneous. | Not clearly erroneous. |
| Sufficiency of the evidence | C.H. age at time of incident established; evidence sufficient. | Age testimony equivocal; argument fails when viewed favorably to State. | Sufficient evidence; convictions upheld. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Tosh, 278 Kan. 83 (2004) (two-step prosecutorial misconduct standard used)
- State v. Trautloff, 289 Kan. 793 (2009) (overbreadth and notice concerns; precursor to clearly erroneous standard)
- State v. Wade, 284 Kan. 527 (2007) (underlying felony notice relevance; warnings about ambush)
- State v. Riojas, 288 Kan. 379 (2009) (limitations on admissibility and limiting instructions for 60-455)
- State v. Gunby, 282 Kan. 39 (2006) (exemplary list of material facts under 60-455)