Legal Opinion

State v. Aleman

Court of Appeals of Kansas

Decided April 10, 1992No. 66,359PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Briscoe, C.J.:

Defendant Miguel Aleman appeals the sentence imposed following his nolo contendere plea to possession of cocaine (K.S.A. 1991 Supp. 65-4127a). Aleman contends the court improperly applied K.S.A. 1991 Supp. 21-4608(3) to conclude that a consecutive sentence was mandatory. He argues the court should have relied upon K.S.A. 1991 Supp. 21-4608(8), which gives the court discretion to impose either a consecutive or a concurrent sentence. Aleman seeks remand to the district court for resentencing.

Aleman also appeals from the denial of his post-conviction motion filed pursuant to K.S.A.…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Hill v. LockhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  2. State v. CarmichaelSupreme Court of Kansas · 1986
  3. State v. MagnessSupreme Court of Kansas · 1987
  4. State v. ZirkleCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1991
  5. State v. WilcoxSupreme Court of Kansas · 1989

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. State v. GonzalesSupreme Court of Kansas · 1994
  2. State v. PollardSupreme Court of Kansas · 2002
  3. State v. ChronisterCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1995
  4. Maggard v. StateCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 2000
  5. State v. FlanaganCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1994

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API