State v. Watkins, 110702

Joshua H. Watkins pleaded no contest to aggravated assault on a law enforcement officer (level 6 person felony), fleeing and eluding (level 9 nonperson felony), and driving while suspended (class B misdemeanor).
The district court sentenced Watkins to 37 months' imprisonment plus 24 months' postrelease supervision and found he used a truck as a deadly weapon, triggering registration under the Kansas Offender Registration Act (KORA).
Watkins appealed, arguing (1) the deadly-weapon finding that triggered KORA registration violated Apprendi because it was not submitted to a jury and proved beyond a reasonable doubt, and (2) the court erred by relying on his criminal history at sentencing without jury proof. He raised these claims for the first time on appeal.
The Court of Appeals considered the claims on their merits and affirmed; the Kansas Supreme Court granted review of the Apprendi and ex post facto questions.
The Supreme Court affirmed, holding KORA is a civil, nonpunitive regulatory scheme as to the relevant offenders (following Petersen-Beard, Meredith, Huey), so the deadly-weapon judicial finding did not implicate Apprendi; the criminal-history Apprendi challenge was likewise rejected.
Opinions: majority opinion applying precedent that KORA is nonpunitive; a concurrence stressing stare decisis despite personal disagreement with precedent; a dissent arguing KORA is punitive in effect and Apprendi requires a jury finding.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Watkins)	Held
Whether KORA registration requirements constitute punishment such that a judicial deadly-weapon finding triggering registration must be found by a jury under Apprendi	State: KORA is a civil, nonpunitive regulatory scheme and thus the judicial deadly-weapon finding need not satisfy Apprendi	Watkins: Registration is punitive in effect; a fact increasing punishment (deadly-weapon use) must be submitted to a jury and proved beyond a reasonable doubt	Held: KORA is civil/nonpunitive for these offenders under existing precedent; Watkins failed to show clearest proof to the contrary, so Apprendi does not apply to the judicial deadly-weapon finding; judgment affirmed
Whether the district court's use of Watkins' criminal history at sentencing violated Apprendi	State: Sentencing facts about prior convictions or criminal history may be considered without jury findings beyond a reasonable doubt under Kansas precedent	Watkins: His increased sentence based on criminal-history facts not proved to a jury violates Apprendi	Held: Rejected; Kansas precedent permits consideration of criminal history at sentencing without jury proof beyond a reasonable doubt

Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000) (holding that any fact that increases the penalty for a crime beyond the statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury and proved beyond a reasonable doubt)
State v. Petersen-Beard, 304 Kan. 192 (2016) (held KORA registration for sex offenders is nonpunitive and civil in intent/effect)
State v. Johnson, 304 Kan. 924 (2016) (discussing limits on Apprendi challenges and sentencing practice)
State v. Ivory, 273 Kan. 44 (2002) (prior Kansas decision regarding sentencing and related procedural issues)
State v. Sherman, 305 Kan. 88 (2016) (discussing stare decisis and stability of precedent)