State v. Sellers, 253 P.3d 20

Sellers was convicted by jury of two counts of aggravated indecent liberties with a child (breast and pubic area) under K.S.A. 21-3504(a)(3)(A); life postrelease supervision and lifetime electronic monitoring were imposed.
The victim, M.R.C., was 13 years old at the time of the alleged offenses occurring in late 2007 at her mother C.M.'s home where Sellers resided with them.
Counts 1 and 2 concerned touching the victim’s breast on or about November 24, 2007 and touching her pubic area on or about November 24, 2007; Count 3 for Halloween touching was acquitted.
The district court later corrected the postrelease term from 36 months to lifetime and imposed lifetime electronic monitoring; the latter was later vacated on appeal.
Sellers challenged (1) denial of his request for a psychological evaluation of the victim, (2) multiplicity of Counts 1 and 2, (3) lifetime postrelease as unconstitutional, (4) sentencing modification, and (5) lifetime monitoring.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the district court abused discretion by denying a psychological evaluation of the victim.	Sellers argues compelling circumstances justify evaluation.	State contends no compelling need under Price factors.	No abuse; no compelling need shown.
Whether Counts 1 and 2 were multiplicitous.	Sellers contends same conduct; single offense.	State contends separate acts with a break and fresh impulse.	Not multiplicitous; two separate offenses.
Whether lifetime postrelease is unconstitutional.	Constitutional challenge preserved; seeks ruling.	Constitutional concerns not preserved for review.	Unpreserved—no ruling on constitutionality.
Whether district court could modify sentence (postrelease term) after close of record.	Argues invalid correction from 36 months to lifetime.	State cites Ballard allowing correction as illegal sentence remains subject to correction under statute.	Lifetime postrelease affirmed; correction to lifetime proper under statute.
Whether lifetime electronic monitoring was proper.	Requested as part of sentence.	Electronic monitoring belongs to Parole Board, not postrelease.	Vacate lifetime electronic monitoring.

State v. Price, 275 Kan. 78 (2003) (guide for compelling circumstances in victim evaluation)
State v. Berriozabal, 291 Kan. 568 (2010) (totality of circumstances; factors for psychological evaluation)
State v. Rucker, 267 Kan. 816 (1999) (abuse of discretion standard for psychological evaluation)
State v. Schoonover, 281 Kan. 453 (2006) (four guiding multiplicity factors and same-conduct test)
State v. Thompson, 287 Kan. 238 (2009) (two-prong test for multiplicity; unitary conduct)
State v. Ballard, 289 Kan. 1000 (2011) (correction of illegal sentence under 22-3504 allowed; off-grid vs grid doctrine)
State v. Bello, 289 Kan. 191 (2009) (age as element in off-grid Jessica's Law offenses; authority to impose postrelease)
State v. Morningstar, 289 Kan. 488 (2009) (off-grid vs grid implications for sentencing)
State v. Gonzales, 289 Kan. 351 (2009) (off-grid sentencing considerations under Jessica's Law)
State v. Reyna, 290 Kan. 666 (2010) (age-related elements not required where not affecting verdict)