State v. Myers, 499 P.3d 1111

Jessica Lynn Myers was arrested for DUI in Johnson County, Kansas (Feb. 14, 2019) and charged as a felony third-time offender based on two prior Missouri DWI convictions (2002 and 2010), one within the 10-year lookback period.
Myers moved to strike the Missouri convictions under K.S.A. 8-1567(i)(3)(B), arguing an out-of-state offense counts only if its elements are identical to or narrower than Kansas law (per Wetrich); the district court granted the motion.
The State filed a timely interlocutory appeal under K.S.A. 22-3603; the Court of Appeals found jurisdiction but, by majority, affirmed exclusion of the Missouri convictions applying the identical-or-narrower test and citing Apprendi concerns.
The Supreme Court granted review to decide (1) whether K.S.A. 22-3603 authorized the State's interlocutory appeal and (2) whether Missouri DWI convictions are "comparable" to Kansas DUI under K.S.A. 8-1567.
The Supreme Court held the State had jurisdiction because the exclusion substantially impaired its prosecution, and on the merits concluded the 2018 legislative amendments and their preamble show the Legislature intended a broader "comparable" standard that includes Missouri DWI convictions (Mo. Rev. Stat. § 577.010).

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Myers)	Held
Does K.S.A. 22-3603 give appellate jurisdiction for the State's interlocutory appeal from an order striking prior convictions?	The order "suppressed evidence" and substantially impaired the State's ability to prosecute, so the State may appeal.	The statute doesn't cover striking prior convictions; no interlocutory jurisdiction.	Court: K.S.A. 22-3603 applies; exclusion substantially impaired prosecution, so appeal is authorized.
Do Missouri DWI convictions qualify as "comparable" prior DUI convictions under K.S.A. 8-1567?	The 2018 amendments reflect a broadened, liberal comparability test; Missouri DWI is specifically intended to count.	Wetrich requires out-of-state elements to be identical to or narrower than Kansas elements; Missouri statute is broader and therefore not comparable.	Court: "Comparable" is ambiguous but legislative history and preamble show intent to reject the identical-or-narrower test; Missouri DWI convictions count; Apprendi is not implicated.

Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (Supreme Court decision limiting judicial fact-finding that increases criminal punishment)
James v. United States, 550 U.S. 192 (judicial inquiry into statutory elements is legal interpretation, not forbidden factfinding)
State v. Wetrich, 307 Kan. 552 (Kansas case addressing meaning of "comparable offenses" under sentencing scheme)
State v. Newman, 235 Kan. 29 (interpreting "suppressing evidence" to include rulings that substantially impair prosecution)
State v. Stanley, 53 Kan. App. 2d 698 (Court of Appeals decision applying the identical-or-narrower elements test to out-of-state DUIs)
State v. Kleypas, 282 Kan. 560 (order excluding sentencing evidence can substantially impair prosecution and support interlocutory appeal)