State v. Woodbury
| Decision Date | 09 May 1931 |
| Docket Number | 29,135 |
| Citation | 298 P. 794,133 Kan. 1 |
| Parties | THE STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, v. F. C. WOODBURY, Appellant |
| Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Decided January, 1931.
Appeal from Brown district court; C. W. RYAN, judge. Opinion denying a rehearing filed May 9, 1931. (For original opinion of affirmance see 132 Kan. 22, 294 P. 928.)
Petition denied.
J. J Schenck, F. A. Sloan, C. P. Schenck, all of Topeka, E. R Sloan, of Holton, and F. M. Pearl, of Hiawatha, for the appellant.
William A. Smith, attorney-general, Harry A. Lanning, county attorney, S. M. Brewster and Charles Rooney, both of Topeka for the appellee.
OPINION
OPINION DENYING A REHEARING.
The petition for rehearing in this case presents and argues questions, with one exception, that have been heretofore considered and on which conclusions were reached as expressed in the written opinion. The reargument of them was very properly and helpfully made in the light of and in connection with the reasons given and views announced in the opinion. But after full consideration of the new suggestions and reargument made the court is not convinced of the duty or necessity of making any change in the opinion or the conclusions therein reached.
The one exception noted above is a new matter and different from anything that had been presented in the original briefs. It is with regard to the resentence directed to be made. The closing paragraph of the opinion was as follows:
"The judgment is affirmed, but the cause is remanded to the district court of Brown county with instructions to resentence the defendant, imposing the penalty in accordance with the law in effect at the time of the commission of the crime." (p. 35.)
The question is asked whether the resentence should apply to those counts only where the sentence given was wrong because it was made under the new law, while the crime charged was under the old law where the penalty was different from what it now is under the new law, or should the defendant be resentenced as to all the counts at one time? We answer this question by stating that there must be but one sentence. The resentence should cover all the counts, those where there was no mistake as well as those in which a mistake was found. The statute (R. S. 62-1512) and the well-established rule as to the sentence on any or all of the counts running concurrently or consecutively...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Snow, No. 93,749.
...single judgment should be pronounced declaring the full measure of punishment to be imposed for all of the offenses. State v. Woodbury, 133 Kan. 1, 2, 298 Pac. 794 (1931) (concluding that resentencing for all 10 counts was proper even though only 7 of the counts had been sentenced incorrect......
-
State v. Freeman
...may not be appealed until the defendant is sentenced or the imposition of sentence is suspended pursuant to 22-3608. State v. Woodbury, 133 Kan. 1, 298 Pac. 794 (1931); Roberts v. State, 197 Kan. 687, 689, 421 P.2d 48 (1966); 21 Am.Jur.2d, Criminal Law § 525, p. 509; 24 C.J.S., Criminal Law......
-
State v. Hawkins
...it used in K.S.A. 21-4720(b)(5). This conclusion is supported by Kansas caselaw. A 1931 Kansas Supreme Court case, State v. Woodbury, 133 Kan. 1, 2, 298 P. 794 (1931), concluded that a defendant in a multiple-conviction case should be resentenced on "all the counts, those where there was no......
-
State v. Morningstar
...appeal, because the sentences collectively comprised a single, whole judgment. 293 Kan. at 765–66, 267 P.3d 751 (citing State v. Woodbury, 133 Kan. 1, 2, 298 P. 794 [1931], and subsequent cases). But the Guder court held that the KSGA abrogated that earlier authority and further held that a......
-
Appellate Decisions
...sentence from concurrent to consecutive. Guder appealed. Relying on State v. Snow, 282 Kan. 323 (2006), and State v. Woo-bury, 133 Kan. 1 (1931), Court of Appeals affirmed in unpublished opinion. Review granted on issue of whether a district court may modify a previously imposed sentence on......