Legal Opinion

Wilkinson v. State

Court of Appeals of Kansas

Decided November 7, 2008No. 99,169PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Leben, J.:

David Willdnson pled guilty to a second charge of possession of cocaine based on a plea agreement in which the State agreed to recommend that his sentences for the two convictions be concurrent. The concurrent sentences were a significant incentive for the plea because concurrent sentences all share the same clock; the defendant serves only the longest sentence as less serious ones tick away alongside it. Consecutive sentences run separately and result in longer time in prison. But before Wilkinson could have been granted concurrent sentences, he had to clear a very high hurdle —…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. State v. HolmesSupreme Court of Kansas · 2004
  2. State v. FloresSupreme Court of Kansas · 2000
  3. Bruner v. StateSupreme Court of Kansas · 2004
  4. Wilkins v. StateSupreme Court of Kansas · 2008
  5. City of Ottawa v. LesterCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 1991

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. State v. BrickerSupreme Court of Kansas · 2011
  2. State v. MorrisSupreme Court of Kansas · 2014
  3. State v. AtteberryCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 2010
  4. State v. HiltonCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 2013
  5. Rodriguez v. StateCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 2020

4 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