TOPEKA—A three-judge panel of the Kansas Court of Appeals will hear oral arguments Tuesday, September 19, at the Bowlus Fine Arts Center in Iola.
Judges Angela Coble, Thomas Malone, and Sarah Warner will hear oral arguments in three cases at 9 a.m. The session is open to the public.
Students from several area high schools will attend the session. After oral arguments conclude, the judges will discuss the court system and explain how a case progresses from filing to trial to appeal. They will also answer questions from students and other members of the public about the court and court procedures.
“The Court of Appeals is a traveling court, and we welcome any chance to hear cases around our state and talk to the public about our court system,” said Coble. “We are excited to be in Allen County and look forward to meeting members of the community in Iola and the surrounding county.”
Oral arguments
Attorneys for each side will present arguments to the judges, and the judges will have a chance to ask questions. The court will then take each case under consideration and will issue a written decision at a later date, usually within 60 days.
There are 14 judges on the Court of Appeals, and they sit in panels of three to decide cases. In fiscal year 2022, the Court of Appeals resolved appeals in 1,060 cases, including 781 in which the court issued a formal written decision.
The three cases to be heard September 19 in Iola are summarized below. They originate from Cherokee, Crawford, and Neosho counties.
9 a.m. Tuesday, September 19
Appeal No. 124,725: State of Kansas v. Brian Michael Waterman
Cherokee County: (Criminal Appeal) Waterman appeals his jury convictions of attempted first-degree murder, aggravated kidnapping, and aggravated burglary after he stormed into Bob Hopkins’ home and repeatedly stabbed him. Waterman went to confront Hopkins because he believed Hopkins had sexually abused his daughter. Once inside Hopkins' house, Waterman locked the door, stabbed Hopkins 17 times with his pocketknife, dumped bleach on his head, and fled to Oklahoma. Hopkins survived the stabbing, but later died before trial.
Issues on appeal are whether: 1) the State presented insufficient evidence to support his aggravated kidnapping conviction; 2) the district court violated Waterman’s right to present a defense by excluding certain witnesses; 3) the district court erred by failing to instruct the jury on criminal restraint as a lesser-included offense of aggravated kidnapping; 4) the State intentionally misappropriated his confidential attorney-client communications; 5) the district court abused its discretion by failing to grant his pretrial motion for substitute counsel; and 6) Waterman received an illegal sentence because the district court miscalculated his criminal history score.
Appeal No. 125,743: State of Kansas v. Coby Landon Cupp
Crawford County: (Criminal Appeal) Deputies responding to a late-night, single-vehicle accident found Cupp alone in his truck, lying with his feet toward the pedals and head toward the passenger side, unconscious with apparent injuries. Before medical personnel could transfer him to a hospital, deputies instructed medical personnel—without a warrant—to draw Cupp's blood for alcohol analysis. The blood test showed a blood alcohol concentration of 0.29 and Cupp was charged with drunk driving crimes. At trial, Cupp testified he was not the driver of his vehicle, but it was a person who left the scene. He also testified he was conscious and coherent at the scene. After hearing all testimony, a jury found Cupp guilty of one count of driving under the influence, second offense, with a blood alcohol content of 0.08 or higher. Additionally, the jury found him guilty of the alternative count of driving under the influence, incapable of safely operating a vehicle. Cupp appeals his conviction.
Issues on appeal are whether the district court erred by: 1) denying Cupp’s motion to suppress the evidence derived from his warrantless blood draw; 2) permitting one responding deputy to testify in an expert capacity when the deputy testified the engine block's temperature indicated the truck had likely been driven within a few hours; 3) accepting the jury verdict form with both the original and alternative charges marked as guilty; and 4) denying his motion for judgment of acquittal or, in the alternative, a new trial.
Appeal No. 125,528: Ashley Clinic, LLC, v. Scott Coates, M.D., and Labette County Medical Center d/b/a Labette Health
Neosho County: (Civil Appeal) This appeal is about a noncompete provision in Coates' employment contract with Ashley Clinic, LLC. Ashley Clinic sued Coates and Labette County Medical Center in the Neosho County District Court, alleging Coates breached a noncompete provision in his contract with Ashley Clinic when he left to work for Labette. After a five-day jury trial, the jury found for Ashley Clinic on three claims: (1) Coates breached a 2003 confidentiality agreement, awarding $9,437.50 in damages; (2) Coates breached a noncompete provision in a 2006 amended-employment agreement, awarding $464,476.00 in damages; and (3) Labette tortiously interfered with the 2006 amended-employment agreement, awarding $739,523.06 in damages. Labette and Coates appeal six aspects of this jury trial, concerning application of the Kansas Tort Claims Act and the sufficiency of the evidence presented at trial. Ashley Clinic raises three issues in a cross-appeal, concerning application of the Kansas Tort Claims Act and its unjust enrichment claim against Labette which the district court denied.