State v. Wells, 297 Kan. 741

Wells was convicted of felony murder and child abuse in connection with B.C.'s death and received consecutive life and 55-month terms with post-release supervision.
K.S.A. 60-455 evidence by Crosetto about changes in B.C.’s behavior and injuries was admitted over objection.
Medical and law-enforcement testimony showed pre-death abuse indicators and head trauma consistent with non-accidental injury; autopsy supported homicide ruling.
Wells gave multiple inconsistent statements about B.C.’s injuries and the 911 call, ultimately admitting shaking B.C. “pretty hard.”
District court sentenced Wells; nunc pro tunc order altered the post-release term from parole to lifetime post-release, which the court later vacated upon review.
Court noted Berry v. State and related developments governing lesser included offenses and their applicability to Wells’ direct appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Limiting instruction on 60-455 evidence	Wells contends Crosetto's testimony required a limiting instruction.	Wells argues improper admission without limiting instruction.	No error; Crosetto’s testimony not 60-455 evidence; no limiting instruction required.
Prosecutorial misconduct regarding expert Dr. Young	Prosecutor improperly commented on Young’s credibility by referencing payment and motives.	Arguments were within permissible cross-examination and closing, not reversible misconduct.	Closing stayed within bounds; no reversible prosecutorial misconduct.
Right to substitute counsel	Failure to further inquire after Wells expressed dissatisfaction violated Sixth Amendment rights.	Trial court properly declined substitution; no abuse of discretion.	No abuse; district court properly declined to appoint new counsel.
Alternative means in felony murder instruction	There was evidence of attempted abuse; Berry requires instructions on lesser offenses if warranted.	Amendment to 21-5109(b)(1) eliminates lesser offenses; no instruction required.	Statute amendments apply prospectively; Berry controls; no lesser-included-offense instruction required.
Exclusion of Wells’ letters	Letters would rebut assertions that Wells was abusive and uncaring.	Letters were irrelevant, cumulative, and potentially prejudicial to credibility.	Exclusion proper; letters had no bearing on key issues and were cumulative.

State v. Berry, 292 Kan. 493 (2011) (abandons the traditional rule; outlines when lesser offenses must be instructed)
State v. Cheffen, 297 Kan. 689 (2013) (controls whether to give unrequested lesser-included offenses under felony murder)
State v. Brown, 295 Kan. 181 (2012) (framework for identifying alternative means in disjunctive statute language)
State v. Jones, 273 Kan. 756 (2002) (prosecutor may discuss witness bias; closing argument caveat)
State v. Williams, 295 Kan. 506 (2012) (proper standard for sua sponte lesser-included instructions under 22-3414(3))