State v. Nelson
243 P.3d 343
| Kan. | 2010Background
- Nelson was convicted of premeditated first-degree murder, burglary, and three counts of forgery arising from the death of his stepfather, Swartz.
- Nelson admitted striking Swartz repeatedly with a baseball bat; the State contested that Nelson entered Swartz's home and killed him in his bed.
- Evidence showed forged checks on Swartz's account and various pre- and post-crime conduct including discarding the bat and clothing.
- The district court sentenced Nelson to life with a hard 50 minimum for murder, with burglary and forgery sentences running consecutive to that term.
- On appeal, Nelson challenges imperfect self-defense instructions, first-degree murder instructions, admission of prior crimes evidence, and the hard-50 sentencing standard.
- The court affirms the convictions but remands for resentencing on the first-degree murder conviction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Imperfect self-defense instruction | Nelson | Nelson | Not entitled; instruction not supported |
| First-degree murder instructions | Nelson argues 54.01 impermissibly lowers burden and affects premeditation | State argues Ellmaker supports instruction and burden not altered | Instruction upheld; burden not improperly reduced |
| Admission of prior crimes evidence | Nelson contends improper admission of prior burglary/forgery | State argues admissible for intent/identity/mistake absence | Admission barred; remanded on preservation issue |
| Hard 50 sentencing standard | Nelson argues wrong standard used for aggravating factors | State contends standard is met or remand unnecessary | Remanded for resentencing to apply correct standard (preponderance) |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Ellmaker, 289 Kan. 1132 (2009) (upholds 54.01 absence of burden-shifting on premeditation)
- State v. Moore, 287 Kan. 121 (2008) (instructional standard for lesser included offenses)
- State v. Spain, 263 Kan. 708 (1998) (preponderance standard for aggravating factors in hard 50)
- State v. Jones, 283 Kan. 186 (2007) (reasonable doubt standard debate on aggravating factors)
- State v. Riojas, 288 Kan. 379 (2009) (contemporaneous objections requirement applies to evidence ruling)
- State v. Gideon, 257 Kan. 591 (1995) (pre-Madrid-era context on mitigating factors standard)
- State v. Vasquez, 287 Kan. 40 (2008) (preponderance standard in aggravation determinations)
- State v. Warledo, 286 Kan. 927 (2008) (preponderance standard applied to aggravation)