State v. Uk, 461 P.3d 32

On March 9, 2017, Sony Uk entered an Emporia apartment building carrying a shotgun and, after witnesses heard arguing, multiple close-range shotgun blasts were fired; Mahogany Brooks died from multiple wounds, most inflicted while she was alive and some potentially individually fatal.
Witnesses heard a quarrel immediately before the shooting, a pause, running and a woman crying for help; Uk was seen with the shotgun standing over Brooks and later had Brooks’ blood on his clothing and shoe.
Investigators recovered four spent shells in the hallway (two beside Brooks’ body), one spent shell in a bedroom doorway, and one in the shotgun; a Mossberg shotgun bought by Uk and matching shells were recovered from the apartment.
Uk was charged with first-degree premeditated murder; his counsel requested a voluntary manslaughter instruction and objected when it was denied; counsel did not object to the court’s PIK-form premeditation instruction.
The district court instructed the jury on first-degree premeditated murder and intentional second-degree murder; the jury convicted Uk of first-degree premeditated murder. Uk appealed, challenging (1) denial of the voluntary manslaughter instruction and (2) the adequacy of the premeditation instruction.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Uk)	Held
Whether trial court erred by refusing voluntary manslaughter instruction	No legally sufficient provocation shown; instruction not factually appropriate	Evidence of an argument/sudden quarrel before shooting warranted the instruction; jury should decide intensity	Denied; no legally sufficient provocation shown, so instruction not warranted
Whether premeditation instruction (PIK 54.150(d)) inadequately distinguished premeditation from intent	PIK instruction correctly defines premeditation and differentiates it from intent	Instruction blurred distinction with statutory intent language; older phrasing ("plan, contrive or scheme") required	Affirmed; PIK instruction legally appropriate and clear

State v. Plummer, 295 Kan. 156 (discusses standard for reviewing refusal to give lesser included instruction)
State v. Ward, 292 Kan. 541 (harmless-error standard for nonconstitutional instruction errors)
State v. Bernhardt, 304 Kan. 460 (defines legally sufficient provocation; mere words usually insufficient)
State v. Coop, 223 Kan. 302 (holds "sudden quarrel" is a form of provocation for heat of passion)
State v. Northcutt, 290 Kan. 224 (lack of provocation defeats voluntary manslaughter instruction)
State v. Wade, 295 Kan. 916 (discussion of sudden quarrel/heat of passion language)
State v. Hilt, 299 Kan. 176 (court’s gatekeeping role in assessing factual appropriateness of manslaughter instruction)
State v. Gentry, 310 Kan. 715 (lesser included offense instruction standards)
State v. Williams, 308 Kan. 1439 (standard for assessing unpreserved instruction errors under clear-error review)
Craft v. State, 3 Kan. 450 (historical definition of premeditation referenced by defendant)