State v. Jones
| Decision Date | 08 May 1982 |
| Docket Number | No. 53813,53813 |
| Citation | 231 Kan. 366,644 P.2d 464 |
| Parties | STATE of Kansas, Appellant, v. T. L. JONES, Appellee. |
| Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court
In a prosecution under K.S.A.1981 Supp. 8-262, for driving while one's license is suspended, it is incumbent upon the State to offer proof that a copy of the order of suspension, or written notice of that action, has been mailed to the last known address of the licensee according to the division's records. The State need not prove that the licensee actually received the notice, had actual knowledge of the revocation, or had specific intent to drive while the license was suspended.
Kenneth R. Smith, Asst. Dist. Atty., argued the cause; Robert T. Stephan, Atty. Gen. and Gene M. Olander, Dist. Atty., were with him on the brief, for appellant.
Robert M. Brown, Topeka, argued the cause, and was on the brief, for appellee.
This is an appeal by the State on a question reserved, K.S.A. 22-3602(b)(3), following the trial and acquittal of the defendant, T. L. Jones, on a charge of driving while his license was suspended, in violation of K.S.A.1981 Supp. 8-262. The trial court held that the State failed to show notice to the defendant that his driver's license was suspended, and that notice to the defendant was essential before a violation of the statute could be found. The State contends that K.S.A.1981 Supp. 8-262 is an absolute liability statute, and that no showing that defendant was given notice of suspension is necessary.
The facts are not in dispute. Jones was stopped for speeding on May 15, 1981. A computer check disclosed that his driver's license was suspended on September 22, 1980, and remained suspended. Jones was arrested and charged with speeding and driving while his license was suspended. He pled guilty to speeding, and that matter is not before us. He pled not guilty to driving while his license was suspended, and at the close of a bench trial the judge found him not guilty, finding that "notice or knowledge and an intent to drive in violation of that notice" was essential, and that the State had not met its burden of proving either notice or knowledge.
The State first calls our attention to K.S.A. 21-3204, which provides:
"A person may be guilty of an offense without having criminal intent if the crime is a misdemeanor and the statute defining the offense clearly indicates a legislative purpose to impose absolute liability for the conduct described."
The State contends that driving while one's license is suspended is an offense within the quoted statute, and in support of its position cites State v. Merrifield, 180 Kan. 267, 303 P.2d 155 (1956), State v. Baker, 1 Kan.App.2d 568, 571 P.2d 65 (1977), and City of Overland Park v. Rice, 222 Kan. 693, 567 P.2d 1382 (1977). In Merrifield, we said:
180 Kan. at 269, 303 P.2d 155.
The opinion in Merrifield, however, makes it clear that the defendant in that case had actual knowledge that his driver's license had been suspended. His defense was that the sheriff had, in substance, directed him to drive, and that he had no intent to violate the law. In Baker, the Court of Appeals...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Keihn
...Others require constructive notice or objective knowledge. See State v. Jennings (1986), 150 Ariz. 90, 722 P.2d 258; State v. Jones (1982), 231 Kan. 366, 644 P.2d 464 (notice is conclusive proof); Zamarripa v. First Judicial District Court (1987), 103 Nev. 638, 747 P.2d 1386 (non-receipt no......
-
State v. Lewis
...violator. However, defendant cites to no authority for this proposition. The State, on the other hand, relies on State v. Jones, 231 Kan. 366, 644 P.2d 464 (1982), for its claim that notice by regular mail to the licensee's last known address is adequate. Jones, however, did not deal with d......
-
State v. Vorrice
...the defendant has either actual or constructive knowledge that his or her driving privileges were suspended. See State v. Jones, 231 Kan. 366, 368, 644 P.2d 464 (1982); State v. Campbell, 24 Kan.App.2d 553, 555–57, 948 P.2d 684,rev. denied 263 Kan. 887 (1997). The State presented absolutely......
-
State v. Swain
...v. Carmer, 465 N.W.2d 303, 304 (Iowa App.1990) (knowledge is not element of driving while license is suspended); State v. Jones, 231 Kan. 366, 368, 644 P.2d 464 (1982) (for conviction of misdemeanor of driving with suspended license, state must send copy of order of suspension but need not ......
-
A Species Unto Themselves: Professional Disciplinary Actions
...was relying on in bringing the charges). A motion to publish is pending. 132. 253 Kan. 602, 860 P.2d 684 (1993). 133. State v. Jones, 231 Kan. 366, 644 P.2d 464 (1982) (holding that due process is satisfied where the Kansas Department of Revenue mails notice of suspension to licensee at the......