State v. J.L.J.

547 P.3d 501

STATE of Kansas, Appellee,

v.J.L.J., Appellant.

No. 125,430

Supreme Court of Kansas.

Oral Argument Held February 2, 2024.

Opinion Filed May 3, 2024.

Appeal from Leavenworth District Court; Gerald R. Kuckelman, judge.

Korey A. Kaul, of Kansas Appellate Defender Office, argued the cause and was on the briefs for appellant.

Ethan C. Zipf-Sigler, assistant solicitor general, argued the cause, and Kris W. Kobach, attorney general, was with him on the brief for appellee.

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

J.L.J. opened fire on a car after one of its passengers ripped off J.L.J.’s cousin in a gun sale. A 12-year-old boy riding in the car was killed. The State charged J.L.J. with first-degree felony murder and several other offenses. J.L.J., who was a juvenile at the time of the shooting, was certified for adult prosecution. At trial, J.L.J. testified he was acting in self-defense. The jury rejected J.L.J.’s self-defense claim and convicted him on all charges.

On direct appeal to our court, J.L.J. raises several claims of error. First, he argues that numerous prosecutorial errors warrant reversal of his convictions. He claims the prosecutor erred during voir dire by asking potential jurors if they would do their "job" and convict J.L.J. if the State proved his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. We agree this was error but conclude it was harmless, which means the error did not contribute to or affect the jury’s verdict.

J.L.J. also argues the prosecutor misstated the law on self-defense during closing argument. We disagree. The prosecutor was simply explaining that the evidence better aligned with the State’s theory that J.L.J. recklessly discharged his firearm into an occupied vehicle than with J.L.J.’s theory of self-defense.

J.L.J. then argues the prosecutor inflamed the prejudices of the jury during closing argument by stating that J.L.J. had not been thinking about his daughter during the shooting. But the prosecutor’s argument simply recited a series of questions from J.L.J.’s cross-examination. And J.L.J. failed to lodge a timely and specific objection to these questions to preserve them for appellate review, as required under K.S.A. 60-404. J.L.J. cannot circumvent the contemporaneous-objection rule by repackaging his evidentiary challenge in prosecutorial-error dressing.

Second, J.L.J. argues that the State unconstitutionally pitted his right to prepare for his defense against his right to testify at trial by asking J.L.J. on cross-examination whether he had viewed the State’s discovery before taking the witness stand. He claims the State’s impeachment violated the unconstitutional-conditions doctrine, which prevents the State from (1) forcing a defendant to surrender one constitutional right to exercise another and (2) needlessly penalizing a defendant for exercising a constitutional right. But, here, J.L.J. exercised both his right to participate in his defense and the right to testify. And the State’s impeachment served the legitimate purpose of enhancing the reliability and truth-seeking function of the criminal process. Thus, the State’s impeachment did not violate the unconstitutional-conditions doctrine.

Third, J.L.J. argues the combined effect of these alleged trial errors deprived him of a fair trial. And he urges us to reverse his convictions under the cumulative-error doctrine. But we conclude that only one trial error occurred. Thus, the cumulative-error doctrine does not apply.

Finally, J.L.J. argues that the judicial factfindings made to certify him for adult prosecution increased his potential maximum punishment in violation of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 490, 120 S. Ct. 2348, 147 L. Ed. 2d 435 (2000). But J.L.J. failed to preserve this issue for review by first raising it before the district court. And we decline to invoke an exception to our general preservation rule because we have consistently rejected this Apprendi challenge and J.L.J. has not argued why we should depart from the doctrine of stare decisis in this case.

Thus, we affirm J.L.J.’s convictions and sentence.

Facts and Procedural Background

On a sunny evening in April 2021, J.L.J. went to Kare Pharmacy in Leavenworth with his cousin, D.N., and friend, Darvon Thomas. They had arranged to purchase a Glock handgun through social media and planned to meet the seller, Brooke Johnson, in the pharmacy’s parking lot. Unbeknownst to them, Brooke was attempting to pass a BB gun off as a genuine firearm.

The subsequent events were captured by Kare Pharmacy’s surveillance camera. The surveillance footage shows the pharmacy’s parking lot has two opposing rows of about 10 parking spots each. J.L.J., D.N., and Thomas arrived in Thomas’ Dodge Charger. Thomas backed the Charger into a parking spot in the row farthest from the pharmacy and to the left of the camera. A Volkswagen Jetta then pulled into the lot and backed into a parking spot in the row closest to the pharmacy and to the left of the camera. The parking lot’s sole exit was to the right of the camera, and the Jetta was one or two spots closer to the exit than the Charger.

The video shows D.N. approaching the Jetta and exchanging some cash for a gun through the front passenger window. After the exchange, D.N. turned to walk back toward the Charger. He then stopped while briefly inspecting the gun in his hand. He turned back to the front passenger window of the Jetta, which had already been rolled up. D.N. later told police that he realized at that moment he had been given a BB gun rather than the promised Glock, and he had turned to say something to the people in the Jetta.

D.N. then continued to walk toward the Charger, crossing in front of the Jetta. The Jetta began to slowly pull out of its parking spot, immediately turning right toward the exit and away from D.N. and the Charger. As the Jetta made its way toward the exit, J.L.J. stepped out of the front passenger seat of the Charger. He pulled out a gun and pointed it at the Jetta, as it moved toward the parking lot exit. J.L.J. fired 12 rounds at the rear of the Jetta. Eleven of those rounds hit the Jetta, and a twelfth round hit a car driving down a nearby street. B.H., a 12-year-old boy who was sitting in the backseat on the passenger side of the Jetta, sustained three gunshot wounds and later died from his injuries.

Several hours after the shooting, police arrested J.L.J. and D.N. at Thomas’ house. Thomas’ Charger was parked in the backyard. The Charger had no bullet holes or other damage.

During his police interview, J.L.J. initially said someone in the Jetta had shot out one of the Charger’s windows, and Thomas instructed J.L.J. to return fire. J.L.J. also told police that Thomas had gotten the Charger’s window fixed in the few hours between the shooting and J.L.J.’s arrest. After the interviewing detective told J.L.J. that a child had died, J.L.J. changed his story. He said he was not at the scene, but Thomas had told J.L.J. to take the rap for the real shooter. J.L.J. then said he had a daughter and felt remorseful and asked the detective what he wanted to know. In his third version of the incident, J.L.J. said Thomas handed him a gun before the sale and he gave it back to Thomas after the shooting. J.L.J. said Thomas told him to shoot at the people in the Jetta after they gave D.N. a BB gun.

D.N.’s statement to the police corroborated J.L.J.’s third version of the incident. D.N. said he yelled out to Thomas and J.L.J. that the front passenger of the Jetta had given him a BB gun. He then heard Thomas say something like, "Shoot, they got my money."

While searching the Jetta, police found silver BB gun on the floorboard of the driver’s seat and a black BB gun on the floorboard of the seat where B.H. had been sitting. Photos of the Jetta showed most of the bullets hit the rear windshield, trunk, and back bumper. Investigators concluded most of the shots were fired at the rear of the Jetta.

The State charged J.L.J. with one count of first-degree felony murder, two counts of criminal discharge of a firearm at an occupied vehicle, and one count of criminal possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. J.L.J., who was 17 years old at the time of the shooting, was later certified for adult prosecution.

At trial, the driver of the Jetta, S.L., testified Brooke orchestrated the plan to pass the BB gun off as a genuine Glock firearm and sell it to an unsuspecting buyer. S.L. drove Brooke, B.H., and another passenger to Leavenworth in his Jetta to complete the sale. He said the Jetta’s windows were tinted and none of the windows were down when they attempted to leave after the sale. He also said no one in the Jetta pointed a gun.

D.N. testified that he was scared during the sale because he did not know the people in the Jetta. He thought they probably had other guns given the nature of the transaction, but he never actually saw anyone in the Jetta point a gun. He said the windows of the Jetta were up when it was leaving the parking lot, and he could not see inside because the windows were dark.

J.L.J. testified in his own defense. He said that after the sale, D.N. started walking back toward the Charger and then stopped with a shocked look on his face. J.L.J. said he saw the Jetta begin to roll slowly towards D.N, and he thought the Jetta was going to hit D.N. J.L.J. thought he had to shoot because he believed the Jetta’s driver had a gun and was pointing it out the window.

J.L.J. admitted he had given three different versions of the incident during his police interview and was now presenting a fourth version at trial. He said he lied about the identity of the shooter during his police interview because he was "freaked out" and did not know what to do. He also said he had consumed cocaine at Thomas’ house before being picked up by police and was sleepy by the time he was interviewed around 2 a.m. J.L.J. said that before the interview started, the detective told him a 12-year-old girl was killed and...