State v. Snellings, 273 P.3d 739

Snellings pled no contest to eight drug-related charges and one firearm charge; the district court sentenced him to 144 months after downward durational departure.
On appeal, Snellings argued two convictions should be reclassified under less severe penalties due to identical offense sentencing doctrine.
The court analyzes whether two statutes have identical elements and thus must apply the lesser penalty.
The first issue: possession of ephedrine or pseudoephedrine with intent to manufacture (LV 2) vs possession of drug paraphernalia with intent to manufacture (LV 4).
The second issue: manufacturing methamphetamine (LV 1) vs compounding a substance containing ephedrine or pseudoephedrine (misdemeanor under 65-4164).
The Apprendi issue concerns use of prior convictions for sentencing enhancements without jury findings.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Do ephedrine/pseudoephedrine with intent to manufacture overlap with drug paraphernalia with intent to manufacture?	Snellings: elements identical; lesser penalty should apply.	State: overlapping elements exist; Campbell established identity.	Yes; ephedrine/pseudoephedrine with intent to manufacture is identical to paraphernalia with intent to manufacture; remand for LV 4 sentence.
Are manufacturing methamphetamine under 65-4159(a) and compounding a substance containing ephedrine/pseudoephedrine under 65-4164(a) identical?	Snellings: overlap; should be LV 4 vs misdemeanor.	Court of Appeals erred; no overlap since methamphetamine not listed in 65-4164(a).	No overlap; uphold LV 1 for manufacture of methamphetamine.
Does Apprendi v. New Jersey prohibit using prior convictions for sentencing unless proven beyond a reasonable doubt at trial?	Apprendi violation.	Kansas precedent permits using prior convictions for enhancements.	No violation; doctrine consistent with Bennington, Riojas, Ivory; affirmed.

State v. Cooper, 285 Kan. 964 (2008) (identical elements doctrine for overlapping statutes applies)
State v. Campbell, 279 Kan. 1 (2005) (overlap of ephedrine/pseudoephedrine with paraphernalia)
State v. Fanning, 281 Kan. 1176 (2006) (identical offenses require exact elements; cautions on ‘use’ vs manufacture)
State v. McAdam, 277 Kan. 136 (2004) (overlap where statute lists methamphetamine by name; not controlling here)
State v. Ivory, 273 Kan. 44 (2002) (Apprendi-like sentencing considerations; prior convictions use)
State v. Dalton, 41 Kan.App.2d 792 (2008) (rejects ‘materials’ inclusion in paraphernalia after Campbell)
State v. Adams, 43 Kan.App.2d 842 (2010) (reliance on Dalton-like arguments; appellate reasoning cited)