explaining that Jenkins interpreted statutes based on the indeterminate sentencing scheme, which the Kansas Sentencing Guidelines Act replaced; however, even under determinate sentencing as prescribed in the present sentencing guidelines, sentences are still aggregated
Summary of this case from Attorney General Opinion NoNo. 93,518.
December 2, 2005.
Appeal from Atchison.
Decision without published opinion. Affirmed.
explaining that Jenkins interpreted statutes based on the indeterminate sentencing scheme, which the Kansas Sentencing Guidelines Act replaced; however, even under determinate sentencing as prescribed in the present sentencing guidelines, sentences are still aggregated
Summary of this case from Attorney General Opinion NoFull title:STATE v. CHAPMAN
Court:Court of Appeals of Kansas
Date published: Dec 2, 2005
K.A.R. 44-6-101(b)(1), (3); 44-6-138. State v. Jenkins, 10 Kan. App. 2d 8, 690 P.2d 396 (1984), superseded by…