State v. Dotson

551 P.3d 1272

STATE of Kansas, Appellee,

v.Zshavon Malik DOTSON, Appellant.

No. 125,318

Supreme Court of Kansas.

Oral Argument Held April 23, 2024.

Opinion Filed July 19, 2024.

Syllabus by the Court

1. Premeditation exists when the intent to kill arises before the act takes place and is accompanied by reflection, some form of cognitive review, deliberation, or conscious pondering. Premeditation requires more than mere impulse, aim, purpose, or objective. It requires a period, however brief, of thoughtful, conscious reflection and pondering—done before the final act of killing—that is sufficient to allow the actor to change his or her mind and abandon his or her previous impulsive intentions.

2. When the sufficiency of the circumstantial evidence supporting a jury’s finding of premeditation is challenged on appeal, courts often reference five factors that are said to support an inference of premeditation: (1) the nature of the weapon used; (2) the lack of provocation; (3) the defendant’s conduct before and after the killing; (4) threats and declarations of the defendant before and during the occurrence; and (5) the dealing of lethal blows after the deceased was felled and rendered helpless. While these factors sometimes help appellate courts frame the sufficiency inquiry, they need not always apply them, nor are they limited to those factors. Whether premeditation exists is a question of fact. Thus, when an appellate court reviews the sufficiency of the evidence of premeditation, the determinative question is not whether one or more of these factors are present. Instead, the court must decide whether a rational juror could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that the case-specific circumstances, viewed in a light most favorable to the State, established the temporal and cognitive components of premeditation.

Appeal from Wyandotte District Court; Wesley K. Griffin, judge.

Peter Maharry, of Kansas Appellate Defender Office, argued the cause and was on the briefs for appellant, and Zshavon Dotson, appellant, was on a supplemental brief prose.

Kayla L. Roehler, deputy district attorney, argued the cause, and Claire Kebodeaux, assistant district attorney, Mark A. Dupree Sr., district attorney, and Kris W. Kobach, attorney general, were on the briefs for appellee.

The opinion of the court was delivered by Wall, J.:

A few days after Thanksgiving in 2018, Zshavon Malik Dotson shot and killed his friend Ronald "R.J." Marks Jr. at the Kansas City home that R.J. shared with his mother. Dotson and R.J. had grappled for control of R.J.’s rifle, and Dotson shot and killed R.J. in the kitchen after overpowering him. Dotson insisted at trial that he had acted in self-defense. R.J.’s mother cast Dotson as the aggressor. A jury weighed the conflicting evidence, assessed the credibility of Dotson and the mother, and found Dotson guilty of first-degree premeditated murder and aggravated battery. We now consider Dotson’s appeal.

Dotson and his appellate attorney both filed briefs in this appeal, and there are many issues before us. They argue the State presented insufficient evidence of premeditation, the prosecutors repeatedly misstated the applicable law during closing arguments, the district court made several errors when instructing the jury, Dotson’s trial counsel provided constitutionally ineffective assistance, and our court’s caselaw has made first-degree premeditated murder and second-degree intentional murder into identical offenses. We have carefully considered these challenges, but we disagree with Dotson that there was any error that warrants a reversal. We therefore affirm his convictions.

Facts and Procedural Background

A few facts are undisputed. Dotson and R.J. wrestled over R.J.’s rifle. Dotson overpowered R.J. Dotson shot R.J. And R.J.’s mother, Carolyn Marks, witnessed most of the confrontation. But what precipitated the fight, who the aggressor was, how it ended, and what happened after—those facts were sharply contested at trial. As the State told it, Dotson had argued with R.J. because Dotson had no place to live, and Carolyn would not let him stay at her house. Dotson escalated that argument by diving for R.J.’s rifle, and once he wrenched control of the weapon, he shot and killed R.J. in cold blood. As the defense told it, R.J. and Carolyn were behind on their bills and demanded money from Dotson at gunpoint. Dotson grabbed the gun to defend himself, and he shot R.J. with the rifle only after R.J. pulled a handgun on him. The State’s account relied almost entirely on Carolyn’s testimony; the defense’s account relied almost entirely on Dotson’s testimony

According to Carolyn, she came out of her bedroom when she heard people talking in the living room and found her son and Dotson sitting on opposite sides of a sectional. Dotson had stayed the previous night because his girlfriend had kicked him out, but Carolyn said he could not live there and needed to have someone pick him up. Dotson told her he had no place to go. Carolyn went back to bed to lie down. She came out of her bedroom for a second time when she heard arguing. Dotson and R.J. were still sitting on the couch. Carolyn told them to cut it out and went back to her bedroom.

When Carolyn heard arguing again, she came out of her bedroom for a third time. She could hear the argument—Dotson was saying that R.J. was never there for him and that he had nobody; her son was saying that Dotson was never there for him either but that his mom and he were always helping Dotson. When Carolyn came into the living room, Dotson and R.J. were standing with eyes locked about 6 feet apart. When R.J. turned to look at her, Dotson dove straight for the rifle that had been on the floor next to her son. R.J. dove on Dotson and grabbed the gun. The fight was on.

While Dotson and R.J. were grappling, Carolyn headed back to her bedroom and grabbed a revolver from under her bed She came back into the living room, yelled for the boys to stop, and then shot her revolver in the air as a warning. But the boys did not stop. The shot startled R.J., and Dotson slammed him against the wall. Then with her son still gripping the gun, Dotson swung it back and hit Carolyn in the face with the stock. Carolyn fell unconscious.

When she awoke on the ground, the boys were in the kitchen, still wrestling over the gun. Dotson backed R.J. up against the dryer, hit him with the stock, and knocked him to the ground. As R.J. was falling, he reached his hands out and started to say "no." Dotson shot him twice in "one quick motion." After those shots, her son was "laying with his hands up, eyes looking straight up at the ceiling, not blinking or nothing." Dotson stood over R.J., gun pointed at him, ignoring Carolyn’s pleas. Then after a minute or two, Dotson shot her son several more times. Unlike the "first shots" that had been in the "upper chest area," the second round of shots were "below [the] waist" in the groin. After that, Dotson "took off running and ransacking [the] house" and then fled. Carolyn called the police.

Dotson offered a very different account. According to him, R.J. was agitated because he had been on the phone arguing with somebody about money for the electric bill. R.J. was upset with Dotson because Dotson had not been there to bond him out of jail or to pay the electric bill. Dotson responded that he had bonded R.J. out once and it was not Dotson’s responsibility to keep paying for his mistakes or to pay for them electric bill when he had asked to stay only a few nights. Carolyn told Dotson that if he could not help to pay the bill, he had to leave, and Dotson agreed to do so. R.J. then grabbed his rifle, pointed it at Dotson, and demanded money. Then Carolyn grabbed her gun and pointed it at Dotson too.

Dotson grabbed the barrel of the rifle, pushed R.J. against the wall, and began wrestling over the gun. After 15-30 seconds, Dotson was able to overpower R.J., secure the gun, and send him flying to the ground. Before Dotson could diffuse the situation, R.J. pulled a handgun from his hip to shoot Dotson. Dotson was forced to fire, and he shot consecutive times without pause. After that, he picked up the rifle and the handgun, ran to the bedroom to get his bag, and ran out the front door.

[1] After the State and the defense had presented their evidence, the district court instructed the jury on the charges. A district court must instruct the jury on lesser-included offenses when there is some evidence, viewed in a light most favorable to the defendant, that would reasonably justify the defendant’s conviction for a lesser crime. See State v. Berkstresser, 316 Kan. 597, 601, 520 P.3d 718 (2022). So here, the court instructed the jury that it could find Dotson not guilty or find him guilty of either first-degree murder, second-degree murder, voluntary manslaughter, or involuntary manslaughter, and it described the elements of each offense. The court also explained that it was up to the jury to assess the significance and the credibility of each witness’ testimony. Evidently, the jury determined that Carolyn’s testimony was credible, for it found Dotson guilty of first-degree murder. The jury also convicted Dotson of aggravated battery for striking Carolyn during the fight, but Dotson’s appeal primarily focuses on his murder conviction.

The district court imposed a life sentence with no chance of parole for 25 years—a so-called "hard 25" sentence. Dotson appealed directly to our court, and we have jurisdiction because the district court imposed a life sentence and because Dotson was convicted of an "off-grid" crime, meaning his sentence was not imposed under the grids that set out the presumptive sentences for most felonies. See K.S.A. 22-3601(b)(3)-(4). We heard arguments during a special session at Lansing Middle School on April 23, 2024.

Analysis

Dotson’s principal challenges to his murder conviction focus on the concepts of premeditation and self-defense. He argues the State...