Opinion
No. 107,879.
2013-06-14
STATE of Kansas, Appellee, v. Lee WILLIAMS, Appellant.
Appeal from Wyandotte District Court; Thomas L. Boeding, Judge.
Submitted for summary disposition pursuant to K.S.A.2012 Supp. 21–6820(g) and (h).
MEMORANDUM OPINION
PER CURIAM:
Lee Williams filed a motion for summary disposition of his sentencing appeal pursuant to K.S.A.2012 Supp. 21–6820(g) and (h). The State did not respond to Williams' motion. We have reviewed the record on appeal and find no error in the sentence imposed by the district court.
Williams first contends the use of his criminal history for sentencing purposes in district court case No. 11CR772, without putting it to a jury and proving it beyond a reasonable doubt, increased the maximum possible penalty for his offense of felony theft in violation of Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). This issue has already been decided adversely to Williams and is without merit. See State v. Ivory, 273 Kan. 44, 46–47, 41 P.3d 781 (2002).
Williams also contends the district court abused its discretion by denying his request for a downward dispositional sentencing departure. The district court sentenced Williams to a presumptive term of imprisonment for his conviction. We are without jurisdiction to consider this issue. See K.S.A.2011 Supp. 21–6820(c)(1) (appellate court shall not review any sentence within the presumptive sentencing range for the crime); State v. Huerta, 291 Kan. 831, 837, 247 P.3d 1043 (2011) (reaffirming that K.S.A. 21–4721[c][1] eliminates appeals of presumptive sentences).
Affirmed in part and dismissed in part pursuant to Rule 7.041a (2012 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 62).