State v. Perez, 114554

Background

Daniel Perez was convicted after a jury trial of first-degree premeditated murder (death of Patricia “Trish” Hughes), multiple sex offenses (including rape, aggravated criminal sodomy, sexual exploitation of a child), aggravated assault, and making false information; sentenced to two life terms plus 406 months.
Perez led a communal group (“Angel’s Landing”) where victims (E.H., S.H., K.L., and others) testified Perez repeatedly sexually abused minors and coerced obedience through claims of supernatural power.
Several group members died in separate incidents (plane crash victims, vehicular deaths, other accidents) and life‑insurance proceeds were paid to group members; the State introduced these events to prove motive, plan, and intent.
Detective Ron Goodwyn testified about out‑of‑court information that triggered and informed the investigation; Perez objected as hearsay.
Perez requested an instruction on assisting suicide as a lesser included offense of first‑degree murder; the court denied the instruction.
On appeal Perez challenged admission of Goodwyn’s out‑of‑court statements, denial of the assisting‑suicide instruction, admission of prior‑crime evidence under K.S.A. 60‑455, and certain limiting instructions; he also claimed cumulative error. The Kansas Supreme Court affirmed.

Issues

Issue	State's Argument	Perez's Argument	Held
Admissibility of detective's testimony about out‑of‑court statements (hearsay)	Testimony was nonhearsay when offered to explain investigative steps; admissible for that limited purpose	Statements were offered for truth to show connections among deaths, motive, pattern; therefore hearsay and inadmissible	Even if some testimony was hearsay, most was cumulative; any error was harmless — no reversal
Denial of assisting‑suicide lesser instruction	The evidence indicated homicide (victim did not self‑inflict fatal act); assisting‑suicide instruction not factually supported	Evidence supported theory Trish wanted to die and may have taken her own life; instruction was warranted	Insufficient evidence that Trish drowned herself; omission of instruction not error
Admission of prior‑crime/death/insurance evidence under K.S.A. 60‑455	Evidence was material, relevant to disputed facts (motive, plan, identity), and probative value outweighed undue prejudice; limiting instructions provided	Evidence was highly prejudicial and likely to cause jury to convict based on uncharged bad acts	District court did not abuse discretion; probative value outweighed prejudice; admission affirmed
Limiting instructions for prior‑crime evidence	Instructions were adequate and juries presumed to follow them; sexual‑misconduct evidence may be used for propensity in sex cases	Instructions were flawed (allowed propensity generally or suggested propensity from deaths) and therefore prejudicial	Instructions were not clearly erroneous; wording context made purpose clear; no reversal

Key Cases Cited

State v. Cosby, 293 Kan. 121 (de novo review for admissibility rulings)
State v. Thompson, 221 Kan. 176 (police testimony about reasons for investigation not hearsay when offered to explain conduct)
State v. Cobb, 229 Kan. 522 (assisting suicide instruction analysis where victim did not self‑destroy)
State v. Williams, 303 Kan. 585 (four‑step framework and standards for reviewing jury instruction claims)
State v. Richard, 300 Kan. 715 (K.S.A. 60‑455 analysis: materiality, relevance, probative‑vs‑prejudicial balancing)
State v. Ward, 292 Kan. 541 (harmless‑error standard for instructional error analysis)
State v. Greene, 299 Kan. 1087 (harmless error review for erroneously admitted evidence)
State v. Wilson, 295 Kan. 605 (upholding admission of prior‑crime evidence when probative of identity/plan and limiting instruction given)