State of Kansas v. Daquan Dean

Hutchinson, Kansas criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with battery of a law enforcement officer.

On July 1, 2015, Dean was in the infirmary at Hutchinson Correctional Facility (HCF). Registered nurse Jerry Schmidt was assigned to work in the infirmary. Schmidt testified that Dean was not in good health and had been under observation for possible psychotic behavior and self-harm for two days. Schmidt stated that Dean was subdued when he saw Dean. Dr. Larry Bumguardner, D.O., the medical director at HCF, testified that Dean showed up at the infirmary catatonic, not talking or responding to verbal commands. Bumguardner also stated that he believed that Dean was under the influence of a synthetic cannabinoid called K-2 and the appropriate treatment was to let the drug pass through his system.



During Schmidt's shift, he observed Dean once every half hour. At approximately 8:30 p.m., Schmidt saw that Dean was unresponsive. Schmidt tried speaking to Dean through a food service port in the door and through the intercom, but Dean did not respond. Dean had stripped naked and wrapped himself in a thin mattress.



Corrections Officer Tammy Vanbuskirk testified that she had been observing Dean on her monitor all day. That day, "[h]e was just laying there like a lump on a log." But Schmidt and Vanbuskirk became concerned about Dean's well-being because he showed no movement at all. Schmidt testified that any movement would have eliminated the need to check on Dean, explaining, "If I seen [sic] a big toe move we would never have gone in."



But because Dean was not moving, Vanbuskirk opened the cell and they went in to make sure Dean was okay. Schmidt shook Dean and then saw Dean open one eye. Schmidt started to back up, but Dean "popped up and started swinging." Vanbuskirk tried to stop Dean with pepper spray, to no effect.



Schmidt testified that Dean did not say a word to him during the attack. Schmidt tried to protect himself by blocking the blows. Dean lowered his head and rammed Schmidt against the wall. From there, they fell into the shower area of the isolation room.



* * *



CRIMINAL LAW. JURY INSTRUCTION ERROR. The case addresses whether the district court committed reversible error by failing to instruct the jury on the burden of proof concerning the defense of involuntary intoxication in the appellant's trial for battery of a law enforcement officer. The court concluded that while the instruction on the affirmative defense was legally and factually appropriate, the absence of a specific burden of proof instruction was not clearly erroneous, as the general instructions provided sufficiently guided the jury.



CRIMINAL PROCEDURE. RIGHT TO A SPEEDY TRIAL. The case examines whether the State's delay of over seven years in bringing the appellant to trial violated his constitutional right to a speedy trial. The court determined that significant delays attributed to the appellant's continuances, coupled with the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, did not constitute a violation of speedy trial rights, and there was no demonstrated prejudice to the appellant from the delay.

Key Phrases Convictions for battery of a law enforcement officer. Incomplete jury instruction on involuntary intoxication. Constitutional protection of a speedy trial. Synthetic cannabinoid influence. Affirmative defense of involuntary intoxication.

Defendant was found guilty and was sentenced to 130 months in prison.



Affirmed