State v. Robinson
This text of State v. Robinson (State v. Robinson) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
No. 120,508
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS
STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee,
v.
JERRELL L. ROBINSON, Appellant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appeal from Sedgwick District Court; JEFFREY SYRIOS, judge. Opinion filed November 8, 2019. Affirmed.
Sam Schirer, of Kansas Appellate Defender Office, for appellant.
Matt J. Maloney, assistant district attorney, Marc Bennett, district attorney, and Derek Schmidt, attorney general, for appellee.
Before POWELL, P.J., PIERRON and ATCHESON, JJ.
PER CURIAM: After the district court revoked his probation, Jerrell L. Robinson appealed. He does not challenge the revocation. He argues only—for the first time on appeal—that the district court erred by aggregating three prior violations of a municipal ordinance prohibiting domestic battery into a person felony when calculating his criminal history score.
In State v. Vega-Fuentes, 264 Kan. 10, 15, 955 P.2d 1235 (1998), the Kansas Supreme Court held that "municipal ordinance violations which are comparable to
1 misdemeanors are to be treated as those misdemeanors for purposes of classification and aggregation."
Robinson does not dispute the existence of his prior municipal ordinance violations, nor does he argue that those violations are not comparable to misdemeanor convictions for domestic battery under Kansas state law. Misdemeanor domestic battery in Kansas is either a class A or a class B person misdemeanor, and K.S.A. 2018 Supp. 21- 6811(a) requires that when calculating an offender's criminal history score, three class A or class B person misdemeanors are aggregated to count for one person felony. Under Vega-Fuentes, Robinson's municipal violations were properly treated as misdemeanor domestic battery convictions. Thus, the district court did not err by aggregating Robinson's three prior municipal violations into one person felony when calculating his criminal history score.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
State v. Robinson, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-robinson-kanctapp-2019.