Haddock v. State
Decision Date | 09 November 2006 |
Docket Number | No. 93,500.,93,500. |
Citation | 146 P.3d 187 |
Parties | Kenneth E. HADDOCK, Appellant, v. STATE of Kansas, Appellee. |
Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Richard Ney, of Ney, Adams & Sylvester, of Wichita, argued the cause, and Jessica R. Kunen, of Lawrence, was with him on the briefs, for appellant.
Richard G. Guinn, assistant district attorney, argued the cause, and Steven J. Obermeier, assistant district attorney, and Paul J. Morrison, district attorney, were with him on the brief, for appellee.
Kenneth E. Haddock was convicted of first-degree murder, and his conviction was affirmed on direct appeal in State v. Haddock, 257 Kan. 964, 897 P.2d 152 (1995). In this case, he appeals the denial of his K.S.A. 60-1507 motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel and prosecutorial misconduct and his motions for new trial based on postconviction DNA testing under K.S.A.2005 Supp. 21-2512. This court transferred the case on its own motion pursuant to K.S.A. 20-3018. We affirm the denial of the K.S.A. 60-1507 motion and reverse and remand for further proceedings pursuant to K.S.A.2005 Supp. 21-2512.
In 1993, Haddock was convicted of the first-degree murder of his wife who was found beaten to death and lying under a pile of wood in the garage of their home. His conviction was affirmed on direct appeal, where this court set forth the following relevant facts concerning the trial in this case:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Warrior
...evidence must be material so as to establish prejudice. Wilkins v. State, 286 Kan. 971, 989, 190 P.3d 957 (2008); Haddock v. State, 282 Kan. 475, 506, 146 P.3d 187 (2006); see Banks v. Dretke, 540 U.S. 668, 691, 124 S. Ct. 1256, 157 L. Ed. 2d 1166 (2004); see also Strickler, 527 U.S. at 290......
-
Wilkins v. State
...L.Ed.2d 1166 (2004) (quoting Strickler v. Greene, 527 U.S. 263, 281-82, 119 S.Ct. 1936,144 L.Ed.2d 286 [1999]); Haddock v. State, 282 Kan. 475, 506-507, 146 P.3d 187 (2006). As this court has outlined the "`"When the withholding of evidence by the prosecution is not deliberate and in bad fa......
-
Haddock v. State
...court denied Haddock's motions, and Haddock pursued a second appeal that culminated in this court's decision in Haddock v. State 282 Kan. 475, 146 P.3d 187 (2006)( Haddock II ). In Haddock II , this court remanded the case to the district court after determining the district court erred in......
-
State v. Frantz
...solicited the perjured testimony, or (2) the prosecution failed to correct testimony it knew was perjured.’ " Haddock v. State , 282 Kan. 475, 508, 146 P.3d 187 (2006). Frantz raised a similar claim in her motion for new trial, and the district court found Frantz had failed to establish tha......
-
Waiting for Judgment Day: Negotiating the Interlocutory Appeal in 8 Easy Lessons
...pending matters, so long as the district court has informed the parties how it intends to rule. [33] Haddock v. State, 282 Kan. 475, 493, 146 P.3d 187 (2006); State v. McDaniel, 255 Kan. 756, 761, 877 P.2d 961 (1994); In re J.A., 30 Kan. App. 2d 416, 421, 42 P.3d 215, rev. denied 274 Kan. 1......