State v. Kopf, 46810
| Decision Date | 07 April 1973 |
| Docket Number | No. 46810,46810 |
| Citation | 211 Kan. 848,508 P.2d 847 |
| Parties | STATE of Kansas, Appellant, v. Larry W. KOPF, Appellee. |
| Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court
Questions reserved by the state in a criminal prosecution will not be entertained on appeal merely to demonstrate whether or not error has been committed by the trial court in its rulings adverse to the state. (Following State v. Glaze, 200 Kan. 324, 436 P.2d 377.)
Keith Sanborn, County Atty., argued the cause, and Vern Miller, Atty. Gen., and Keith I. Motley and John Price, Deputy County Attys., were with him on the brief for appellant.
No appearance by appellee.
In this appeal pursuant to K.S.A.1972 Supp. 22-3602 (formerly K.S.A. 62-1703) the state, by way of questions reserved, seeks review of five adverse rulings in a jury trial.
The defendant was charged in an information containing five counts; namely, three counts of murder in the first degree, one count of assault with intent to kill, and one count of aggravated escape. Defendant was found guilty of aggravated escape and not guilty by reason of insanity on the other four counts.
Defendant cannot be retried and any ruling we might make would not affect him. (State v. Logan, 198 Kan. 211, 424 P.2d 565; and State v. Glaze, 200 Kan. 324, 436 P.2d 377.)
Provisions for appeal by the state upon a question reserved under 22-3602 is essentially the same as that appearing in the predecessor statute (62-1703). In the recent case of State v. Glaze, supra, we spoke of the purpose of the statute in these words:
(pp. 324, 325, 436 P.2d p. 378.)
Further in the opinion we pointed out that generally the appeals, by way of questions reserved, involve questions of statewide interest and usually deal with the interpretation of statutes. (See cases cited and statutes involved on page 325, 436 P.2d 377 of State v. Glaze, supra.)
In the instant case three of the questions presented concern the trial court's refusal to submit requested instructions, one deals with the refusal to allow rebuttal testimony and the fifth challenges the alleged undue...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. LaPointe
...Glaze , 200 Kan. at 325–26, 436 P.2d 377 ; see also State v. Mountjoy , 257 Kan. 163, 168, 891 P.2d 376 (1995) ; State v. Kopf , 211 Kan. 848, 848–49, 508 P.2d 847 (1973). "Reserved questions will not be entertained merely to demonstrate whether or not error has been committed by the trial ......
-
State v. Crow, 79,287
...for appeals to the Kansas Supreme Court as a matter of right "upon a question reserved by the prosecution," we held in State v. Kopf, 211 Kan. 848, 508 P.2d 847 (1973), that appeals will not be entertained merely to demonstrate whether error has been committed by the trial court in its ruli......
-
State v. Willcox, 58725
...No. 3722, 215 Kan. 693, 695, 527 P.2d 1020 (1974); State v. Chittenden, 212 Kan. 178, Syl. p 1, 510 P.2d 152 (1973); State v. Kopf, 211 Kan. 848, 508 P.2d 847 (1973); State v. Glaze, 200 Kan. 324, Syl. pp 1 and 2, 436 P.2d 377 (1968). As we noted in Glaze, appeals on questions reserved by t......
-
State v. Gustin
...and any ruling we make on the state reserved question does not affect him. (State v. Glaze, 200 Kan. 324, 436 P.2d 377; State v. Kopf, 211 Kan. 848, 508 P.2d 847.) The United States Supreme Court has held that the fifth amendment guaranty against double jeopardy is enforceable against the s......