PER CURIAM.

Appeal from Johnson District Court; Thomas H. Bornholdt, Judge.
N. Trey Pettlon, of Law Office of N. Trey Pettlon, of Olathe, for appellant. Steven J. Obermeier, assistant district attorney, Stephen M. Howe, district attorney, and Derek Schmidt, attorney general, for appellee.
Before LEBEN, P.J., ATCHESON, J., and BUKATY, S.J.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM.

On May 13, 2011, Defendant Edward Loredo was stopped and arrested for driving under the influence in violation of K.S.A.2010 Supp. 8–1567. He was duly charged with DUI in Johnson County District Court and was found guilty in a bench trial on stipulated facts. The district court sentenced Loredo on May 3, 2012. He contends the district court erred in declining to apply sentencing amendments that went into effect on July 1, 2011, in his case. If applied, the key amendment would have precluded the district court from using Loredo's DUI conviction from 1999 to increase the penalties imposed on him.

In a published opinion issued August 10, 2012, the Court of Appeals rejected the same arguments Loredo makes for retroactive application of that amendment. State v. Reese, 48 Kan.App.2d ––––, Syl. ¶ 5, 283 P.3d 233 (2012). The Reese decision thoroughly considered retroactive application of the amendment and rejected retroactivity as inconsistent with settled Kansas authority considering changes in sentencing statutes. The opinion is well reasoned and controls here. The Kansas appellate courts have regularly held that a criminal defendant is to be sentenced based on the statutory penalties in effect at the time of the offense. State v. Williams, 291 Kan. 554, 559–60, 244 P.3d 667 (2010) (cases cited).

The judgment of the district court sentencing Loredo using the provisions of K.S.A.2010 Supp. 8–1567 in effect at the time he committed the offense is affirmed.