State v. Seward
296 Kan. 979
| Kan. | 2013Background
- Seward pled guilty to one count of rape and one count of aggravated criminal sodomy involving his 11-year-old stepdaughter, R.T.
- He was sentenced to two concurrent hard 25 life sentences under Jessica’s Law and lifetime postrelease supervision.
- The district court denied a departure request and refused to address constitutional challenges; on appeal this court remanded for factual findings.
- On remand, Seward argued factors including his abuse history and low recidivism risk; the district court again held the sentences not disproportionate.
- This court affirmed the two hard 25 life sentences under §9 and Eighth Amendment case-specific review but vacated the lifetime postrelease supervision.
- The court concluded Kansas does not have the harshest penalties for these crimes and that the postrelease term was illegal.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether two hard 25 life sentences are grossly disproportionate | Seward argues the sentences are disproportionate under Eighth Amendment and §9. | Seward contends the offenses and offender justify severe punishment; argues disproportionate only under certain analyses. | Not grossly disproportionate; sentences upheld. |
| Whether lifetime postrelease supervision was proper | Seward argues the postrelease term is unlawful under state law. | State defends postrelease as part of Jessica’s Law scheme. | Vacate lifetime postrelease supervision; remand to correct. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Woodard, 294 Kan. 717, 280 P.3d 203 (2012) (analyzed case-specific Eighth Amendment disproportionality; not disproportionate)
- State v. Gomez, 290 Kan. 858, 235 P.3d 1203 (2010) (established Freeman three-prong framework for §9 disproportionality)
- State v. Freeman, 223 Kan. 362, 574 P.2d 950 (1978) (three-part test for cruel/unusual punishment under Kansas law)
- State v. Britt, 295 Kan. 1018, 287 P.3d 905 (2012) (consolidates Freeman framework; presumes statute constitutional)
- Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48, 130 S. Ct. 2011 (2010) (development of proportionality analysis for non-death sentences)
- State v. Ross, 295 Kan. 424, 284 P.3d 309 (2012) (affirms application of Freeman to Eighth Amendment challenges)
- Woodard, 294 Kan. 901, 281 P.3d 153 (2012) (clarifies relationship between Freeman prongs and Eighth Amendment challenges)