Law Review and Bar Journal References:

"Sexual Abuse Treatment in Kansas' Prisons: Compelling Inmates to Admit Guilt," Katherine Corry Eastman, 38 W.L.J. 949 (1999).

"Criminal Procedure Survey of Cases," 48 K.L.R. 895 (2000).

"K.S.A. 22-4901 et seq.—Offender Registration in Kansas," Rick Kittel, 69 J.K.B.A. No. 6, 28 (2000).

"Criminal Procedure Survey of Recent Cases," 49 K.L.R. 937 (2001).

"Some Reflections on the Constitutionality of Sex Offender Commitment Laws," Stephen R. McAllister, 50 K.L.R. 1011 (2002).

"Beyond Hendricks: The United States Supreme Court Decision in Kansas v. Crane and other issues concerning Kansas' Sexually Violent Predator Act," Kevin J. Breer, 71 J.K.B.A. No. 4, 13 (2002).

"Out of Control: An Ambiguous Decision Raises the Question of Exactly Who Has Control [Kansas v. Crane, 534 U.S. 407 (2002)]," Sarah E. Miller, 42 W.L.J. 353 (2003).

"Treating the Sex Offender at Any Cost: Fifth Amendment Privilege Against Compelled Self-Incrimination in the Prison Context [McKune v. Lile, 122 S.Ct. 2017 (2002)]," Abigail E. Robinson, 42 W.L.J. 725 (2003).

CASE ANNOTATIONS

1. Sexually violent predator act held unconstitutional violation of substantive due process. In re Care & Treatment of Hendricks, 259 K. 246, 247, 912 P.2d 129 (1996); Rev'd, 521 U.S. 346, 117 S.Ct 2072, 138 L.Ed 2d 501 (1997).

2. Trial court is not required to advise defendant of future application of KSVPA before accepting guilty plea. State v. Bussell, 25 K.A.2d 424, 425, 960 P.2d 250 (1998).

3. Commitment hereunder is unconstitutional absent finding defendant suffers from volitional impairment rendering defendant dangerous beyond defendant's control. In re Care and Treatment of Crane, 269 K. 578, 7 P.3d 285 (2000).

4. Respondent, incompetent to stand trial, may be found a sexually violent predator based on prior conduct; no need to determine whether person committed current offenses. In re Goracke, 27 K.A.2d 837, 9 P.3d 595 (2000).

5. The sexually violent predator act did not require state to prove offender's total lack of control over dangerous behavior. Kansas v. Crane, 122 S.Ct 867, 868 (2002).

6. Person entering into consent decree and judgment may not appeal from judgment. In re Care and Treatment of Satthoff, 272 K. 219, 32 P.3d 1173 (2001).

7. Dismissal of earlier sexual predator case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction does not bar state from commencing a new proceeding after violation of probation. In re Care & Treatment of Johnson, 32 K.A.2d 525, 85 P.3d 1252 (2004).

8. Kansas Sexually Violent Predators Act is civil in nature rather then criminal. In re Care & Treatment of Foster, 33 K.A.2d 717, 107 P.3d 1249 (2005).

9. Reversible error for prosecutor in opening statement to describe doctors, lawyers and judge who had concluded defendant was sexually violent predator. In re Care & Treatment of Foster, 280 K. 845, 127 P.3d 277 (2006).

10. Provisions of K.S.A. 60-455 inapplicable to commitment proceedings under Kansas sexually violent predator act. In re Care and Treatment of Colt, 39 K.A.2d 643, 647, 649, 183 P.3d 4 (2008).

11. Cited; error in admitting evidence of prior bad acts to prove intent, absence of mistake or accident and plan. State v. Prine, 287 K. 713, 737, 200 P.3d 1 (2009).

12. In sexually violent predator commitment proceedings, victim's testimony from prior offense allowed despite respondent's offer to stipulate to conviction. In re Care & Treatment of Miller, 289 K. 218, 210 P.3d 625 (2009).

13. Neither K.S.A. 60-455 nor Gunby case govern admission of prior crime evidence in sexually violent predator commitment proceedings. In re Care & Treatment of Colt, 289 K. 234, 211 P.3d 797 (2009).

14. No constitutional violation found in habeas corpus challenge by persons in sexual predator treatment program. Johnson v. State, 289 K. 642, 215 P.3d 575 (2009).

15. Principles of res judicata discussed and applied in second commitment proceeding. In re Care & Treatment of Sporn, 289 K. 681, 215 P.3d 615 (2009).

16. In making a summary determination under K.S.A. 59-29a11, court must enter findings and conclusions sufficient to enable meaningful review. In re Care & Treatment of Miles, 42 K.A.2d 471, 213 P.3d 1077 (2009).

17. Kansas Sexual Violent Predator Act did not violate equal protection by treating sexual predators differently from people civilly committed for mental illness. Merryfield v. State, 44 K.A.2d 817, 241 P.3d 573 (2010).

18. Whenever a person civilly committed under this section files a petition pursuant to K.S.A. 60-1501 et seq., the costs incurred shall be taxed to the county responsible for the costs. Merryfield v. Sullivan, 50 K.A.2d 313, 324 P.3d 1132 (2014).

19. District court erred when it denied the right to a hearing and the right to be appointed counsel at annual review of status for individual involuntarily committed under the sexually violent predator act. In re Care & Treatment of Zishka, 51 K.A.2d 242, 246, 343 P.3d 558 (2015).

20. Adjudication and commitment under the sexually violent predator act requires procedural due process protections. In re Care & Treatment of Ellison, 51 K.A.2d 751, 753, 359 P.3d 1063 (2015).

21. Detention pursuant to the Kansas sexually violent predator act is a deprivation of liberty that requires due process protection. In re Care & Treatment of Ellison, 305 K. 519, 526, 385 P.3d 15 (2016).

22. The state has the burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the individual has been convicted of or charged with a sexually violent offense, and if the issue of a crime's sexual motivation is litigated in a criminal case, the state is estopped from relitigating that point in a proceeding pursuant to the Kansas sexually violent predator act. In re Easterberg, 309 K. 490, 492, 437 P.3d 964, 967 (2019).

23. Civil motion practice is allowed under the Kansas sexually violent predator act. In re Jones, 57 K.A.2d 808, 815, 459 P.3d 827 (2020).