State v. Ho K. Duong
257 P.3d 309
| Kan. | 2011Background
- Duong was charged with aggravated indecent liberties with a child following a library restroom incident involving a 6-year-old boy.
- The trial included conflicting eyewitness accounts and Duong’s misidentification defense; the defense highlighted inconsistent witness descriptions.
- The first trial ended in a hung jury; the second trial found Duong guilty as charged.
- The district court departed from Jessica's Law by imposing 61 months in prison and lifetime postrelease supervision with lifetime electronic monitoring.
- On direct appeal, Duong asserts prosecutorial misconduct in closing argument, failure to give eyewitness instructions, erroneous Allen-type instruction, cumulative error, and improper lifetime monitoring.
- The Kansas Supreme Court affirms the conviction but vacates the lifetime electronic monitoring portion of the sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prosecutorial misconduct in closing arguments | Duong | Duong | No reversible error; arguments within permissible scope |
| Omission of eyewitness identification instruction | Duong | Duong | Omission not clearly erroneous; no reversal |
| Allen-type instruction and burden language | Duong | Duong | Error not clearly erroneous; no reversal |
| Cumulative error | Duong | Duong | Not satisfied; no aggregate reversible error |
| Lifetime electronic monitoring | Duong | Duong | Lifetime monitoring vacated; parole-related monitoring required |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Richmond, 289 Kan. 419 (2009) (prosecutorial misconduct standards and harmless-error framework)
- State v. Tosh, 278 Kan. 83 (2004) (prosecutorial misconduct and plain-error consideration)
- State v. Davis, 275 Kan. 107 (2003) (prosecutorial statements and reasonable inferences about credibility)
- State v. Magallanez, 290 Kan. 906 (2010) (misuse of innuendo or unsworn testimony about witnesses)
- State v. Stone, 291 Kan. 13 (2010) (latitude to draw reasonable inferences in closing; not improper vouching)
- State v. Colston, 290 Kan. 952 (2010) (Allen-type instruction analysis and standard of review)
- State v. Salts, 288 Kan. 263 (2009) (clearly erroneous standard for reviewing Allen-type instructions)
- State v. Jolly, 291 Kan. 842 (2011) (lifetime monitoring and post-release conditions)