State v. Thomas

Supreme Court of Kansas

State v. Thomas

11 P.3d 1171, 270 Kan. 17, 2000 Kan. LEXIS 812

CourtSupreme Court of Kansas

DecidedOctober 27, 2000

DocketNo. 81,461

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 11 P.3d 1171 (State v. Thomas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Kansas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

State v. Thomas, 11 P.3d 1171, 270 Kan. 17, 2000 Kan. LEXIS 812 (kan 2000).

Pincite

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Allegrucci, J.:

This is an appeal by defendant from his conviction of injuiy to a pregnant woman, aggravated battery, and criminal threat. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding: (1) defendant’s counsel’s failure to file timely notice of an alibi defense constituted ineffective assistance of counsel, and (2) defendant’s convictions of injury to a pregnant woman and aggravated battery are multiplicitous. Appellant’s petition for review was granted by this court on March 21, 2000.

We have reviewed the briefs, the arguments, and the record in this case, and we conclude the Court of Appeals was correct. We, therefore, adopt the opinion and affirm the Court of Appeals, reverse the district court, and remand for a new trial.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Allegrucci, J.:

This is an appeal by defendant from his conviction of injuiy to a pregnant woman, aggravated battery, and criminal threat. The Court of Appeals reversed and remanded for a new trial, finding: (1) defendant’s counsel’s failure to file timely notice of an alibi defense constituted ineffective assistance of counsel, and (2) defendant’s convictions of injury to a pregnant woman and aggravated battery are multiplicitous. Appellant’s petition for review was granted by this court on March 21, 2000.

We have reviewed the briefs, the arguments, and the record in this case, and we conclude the Court of Appeals was correct. We, therefore, adopt the opinion and affirm the Court of Appeals, reverse the district court, and remand for a new trial.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

11 P.3d 1171, 270 Kan. 17, 2000 Kan. LEXIS 812, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-thomas-kan-2000.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack