State v. Whorton
Annotate this CaseDefendant Bradley Whorton pled guilty to aggravated criminal sodomy and aggravated indecent liberties with a child. Whorton filed a motion in which he argued that his lack of criminal history justified a departure from the mandatory minimum hard twenty-five life sentence prescribed in Kan. Stat. Ann. 21-4643(a)(1). The sentencing court was unable to find substantial and compelling reasons to depart from the life sentence and denied Whorton's motion. Whorton was sentenced to a life sentence on each count, to be served concurrently. On appeal, the Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the district court properly considered to Wharton's absence of criminal history as a mitigating factor; (2) the district court's refusal to depart from the mandatory minimum was not an abuse of discretion; and (3) it was not arbitrary for the district court to grant a departure based on a lack of criminal history in one case but to deny departure in another case where the same mitigating factor existed.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.