State v. Stevenson
| Decision Date | 20 November 2020 |
| Docket Number | No. 119,677,119,677 |
| Citation | 478 P.3d 781,59 Kan.App.2d 49 |
| Parties | STATE of Kansas, Appellee, v. John Patrick STEVENSON, Appellant. |
| Court | Kansas Court of Appeals |
Randall L. Hodgkinson, of Kansas Appellate Defender Office, Topeka, for appellant.
Jodi Litfin, assistant solicitor general, and Derek Schmidt, attorney general, for appellee.
Before Powell, P.J., Green and Standridge, JJ.
John Patrick Stevenson was convicted by a jury of his peers of criminal threat. He now appeals that conviction, arguing his speedy trial rights were violated, his conviction is both unconstitutional and unsupported by the evidence, and a lesser included instruction of disorderly conduct should have been given. Because the State charged Stevenson in one count with both intentional and reckless criminal threat and because it is possible the jury found him guilty of reckless criminal threat—which the Kansas Supreme Court has declared to be unconstitutional—his conviction for criminal threat must be reversed and the case remanded to the district court for a new trial. We affirm the district court in all other respects.
During the evening of July 27, 2015, Ellis Police Chief Taft Yates received a call about a reckless driver in a white early 1990s Ford truck. Not long after, Yates saw the truck in question make a left turn around a corner "at a high rate of speed."
Yates initiated a traffic stop, exited his patrol vehicle, approached the driver of the truck—Stevenson—and explained the reason for the stop. A passenger was also present. Yates requested Stevenson's driver's license, which Stevenson did not have on him, and learned from dispatch that Stevenson's license had been suspended. Yates told Stevenson that he would have to take him to the Ellis Police Department "and issue him a ticket and some instructions." Yates told the passenger she could follow them to the police department and could take Stevenson home once they were finished. Yates informed Stevenson he would be placed in handcuffs and asked Stevenson if he had anything in his pockets. Stevenson said he had a straight razor in his pocket.
At that same time, Stevenson put his hand into his front left pants pocket, discreetly pulled out a brown prescription bottle, and tossed it on the passenger's seat of the truck. Yates then handcuffed Stevenson and asked what he threw on the seat. Stevenson replied, "Nothing." Yates then reached into the truck and picked up the bottle; he discovered it was a prescription of OxyContin, which is a controlled substance, for Kimberly A. Owston, with whom Stevenson lived and for whom he cared.
Yates then placed Stevenson in the back of his patrol car and told the passenger not to come to the police station after all because Stevenson was also being arrested for possession of OxyContin and would be booked into jail. Yates returned to the patrol vehicle, informed Stevenson of the crimes he was being arrested for, and discussed the pills with Stevenson. Stevenson told Yates he was the primary care giver for Owston and they were her pills, although at times he identified the person he was caring for as a different individual.
Yates transported Stevenson to the Ellis Police Department. There, Stevenson became belligerent and agitated, which continued to escalate as he and Yates were talking. Stevenson began threatening Yates. These threats included threats about Yates' job and his badge, threats about taking Yates out and hanging him, and threats for Yates to take off his gun and badge and take off Stevenson's handcuffs and then Stevenson would "fuck [Yates] all up." Stevenson also exclaimed, "I don't care whether I have cuffs on or not." Stevenson's outburst was captured on video, but apparently a small portion of the video was corrupted, and not all the interaction between Yates and Stevenson was able to be played for the jury.
One video begins after Stevenson had been transported to the police station. It appears Yates was not recording the entire time and at some point deemed it necessary to turn on his body cam because the video starts with what can be assumed to be Yates' finger briefly partially blocking the view while he is turning on the camera. Stevenson is then heard saying, mid-sentence in an agitated manner, then the body cam is pointed at Stevenson and he immediately clams up and declares, Stevenson begins to close a door, and Yates orders him to leave the door alone and come into his office so he can begin Stevenson's paperwork. Of note, Yates was the only officer on duty that night, so he and Stevenson were in the station alone. Stevenson ultimately comes into Yates' office and continues to speak to Yates in an angry manner.
Two females associated with Stevenson arrive at the station and ring the station's door buzzer. Yates informs one of the females that Stevenson is going to jail; she tells Yates that the pills were not Stevenson's and encourages Stevenson to calm down. Yates does not permit her to come into the station. Stevenson angrily rants and walks away. The females, one of whom is crying, buzz the door again and beg for Stevenson to be released. Yates tells them to "explain it to the Judge, please." Yates then goes to find Stevenson, who returned to Yates' office.
As Yates is entering his office, Stevenson states, "Your ass is gonna get hung for this one." Yates begins to work at his computer and is on the phone attempting to get transportation backup. Stevenson is sitting against the far wall in Yates' office with a desk between them. Stevenson occasionally speaks to Yates, at one point saying, "Fuck up my corrections and I'll make your life just as bad as mine." Stevenson begins to get angry again about the pills and abruptly stands up while yelling at Yates, explaining the pills belong to the woman he cares for and they are not his. During this exchange he yells his lawyer is "going to crawl up your fucking ass and choke you out."
Some time passed between splices of the video. When the recording picks up again, Stevenson is in the main portion of the station; Yates' office is off to one side, and Yates is still at his desk. Stevenson states, Stevenson continues to rant for several minutes. At one point during this rant he exclaims, He also exclaimed,
Stevenson quickly reenters Yates' office and continues yelling at Yates. He briefly leaves, then returns and grabs a chair in the office, with his hands still cuffed behind his back, and carries it right up next to Yates' desk, with about a foot and a half between the men. He repeatedly threatens Yates' job, as he has been doing throughout their encounter. At times Yates whispers in an attempt to deescalate the situation. When backup arrives Yates orders Stevenson to leave; Stevenson refuses to do so, prompting Yates to touch his arm, and Stevenson exclaims, After a pat-down and confiscation of the straight razor by the backup officer, Stevenson is transported to the jail.
Yates recalled that Stevenson threatened him with physical violence "at least" three times during the entire encounter. Although Stevenson was handcuffed, Yates testified he took the physical threats "very seriously" because he knew someone could inflict physical harm to another even without their hands.
Initially, the State charged Stevenson with one count of unlawful possession of Oxycodone, one count of criminal threat, and one count of possession of drug paraphernalia. Stevenson pled not guilty. The district court granted Stevenson's request for bond and released him on November 23, 2015. After being released, however, Stevenson disappeared and his whereabouts became unknown until he was arrested in August 2017 in Reno County on outstanding warrants.
After Stevenson's apprehension, the State filed an amended complaint, reducing the charges to a single count of criminal threat because Owston died before a full investigation of the drug charges could be completed. The case proceeded to a jury trial on February 20, 2018.
At trial, Stevenson testified on his own behalf. He testified he was "just upset and venting," He did not mean to threaten Yates and "was just talking shit." He did admit to telling Yates, "I'm going to fuck you up," but said he did so only while venting and was mad. He never admitted it was a threat to communicate violence. He also told the jury he "never meant anything [he] said to [Yates]."
The jury found Stevenson guilty of one count of criminal threat. The district court sentenced him to 12 months' imprisonment.
Stevenson timely appeals.
Stevenson raises four points of error on appeal: (1) His statutory right to a speedy trial was violated; (2) his conviction for criminal threat cannot stand because the criminal threat statute is unconstitutionally overbroad; (3) there is insufficient evidence supporting his criminal threat conviction; and (4) the district court erred in not giving an unrequested disorderly conduct jury instruction because that offense is a lesser included offense of criminal threat.
First, Stevenson argues the district court erred in denying his motion to dismiss for a violation of his statutory speedy trial rights. Specifically, he argues the speedy trial...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Reynolds
...heat of argument and the result of unthinking rage," rather than intentional. Lindemuth , 312 Kan. at 18 ; see State v. Stevenson , 59 Kan. App. 2d 49, 63-64, 478 P.3d 781 (2020) ("talking shit" and "venting" as possible impulsive bluster which undermined the conclusion the jury unanimously......
-
State v. Greiner
...intent to inflict physical or other harm on any person or on property." K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 21-5111(ff) ; see State v. Stevenson , 59 Kan. App. 2d 49, 65, 478 P.3d 781 (2020). A person acts with intent to threaten "when it is such person's conscious objective or desire to engage in the conduc......
-
State v. Cardillo
... ... could have found the statements to be reckless ... criminal threat, a threat "simply spoke[n] in the heat ... of argument and the result of unthinking rage," rather ... than an intentional threat. 312 Kan. at 18; see State v ... Stevenson, 59 Kan. App. 2D 49, 63-64, 478 P.3d 781 ... (2020) ("talking shit" and "venting" as ... possible impulsive bluster which undermined the conclusion ... the jury unanimously found defendant guilty of intentional ... criminal threat), petition for review filed December ... ...