State v. Morningstar
Annotate this CaseDefendant was convicted of rape of a child, aggravated battery, abuse of a child, and child endangerment. The Supreme Court remanded for resentencing. After Defendant was resentenced for his rape conviction, he appealed, challenging whether the district court on remand could order the rape sentence to run consecutive to his other sentences. The court of appeals determined that Defendant’s sentence was not reviewable on appeal because the new sentence was within the presumptive range under the Kansas Sentence Guidelines Act (KSGA). The Supreme Court affirmed the sentence, holding (1) the court of appeals erred in dismissing the appeal because appellate jurisdiction exists to determine whether the district court had authority to impose a consecutive sentence, even if that sentence fell within the presumptive range; (2) running the new rape sentence consecutive to the other sentences was a permissible mechanism under the KSGA for the district court to regulate the sentence’s length; and (3) a district court may designate that the sentence for the primary crime of conviction runs consecutive to the defendant’s other sentences under the KSGA’s multiple-conviction sentencing statute.
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.