State v. Proctor - Kansas Judicial Branch
State v. Proctor - Kansas Judicial Branch
State v. Proctor - Kansas Judicial Branch
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
punishing a first-time offender convicted of aggravated indecent solicitation of a child.<br />
The legislative design in designating the crime as a severity level 5 offense builds in<br />
judicial discretion to consider probation as a nondeparture punishment for some<br />
defendants. That is markedly different from the inflexible sentence challenged in<br />
Harmelin. The mandatory punishment in Harmelin—to be imposed without judicial<br />
discretion for a demonstrably serious crime—was the product of "the collective wisdom<br />
of the Michigan Legislature" in attempting to combat illegal drug use and trafficking.<br />
Harmelin, 501 U.S. at 1006-07 (Kennedy, J., concurring). The legislature could and did<br />
reasonably conclude that the social ills posed by the possession of large quantities of<br />
cocaine to be "momentous enough to warrant the deterrence and retribution of a life<br />
sentence without parole." 501 U.S. at 1003 (Kennedy, J., concurring). That conclusion,<br />
thus, comported with the Eighth Amendment despite its undeniable harshness, according<br />
to the Harmelin majority. See 501 U.S. at 994 ("Severe, mandatory penalties . . . are not<br />
unusual in the constitutional sense.").<br />
The potential for life in prison without parole that <strong>Proctor</strong> challenges does not<br />
operate that way. And we are not presented with the same sort of legislative<br />
determination. Had the <strong>Kansas</strong> Legislature required a mandatory sentence of life in<br />
prison without parole for aggravated indecent solicitation, we would be looking at a<br />
Harmelin-like issue. But the <strong>Kansas</strong> Legislature has not punished the crime in that<br />
manner; it has established a substantially lesser punishment that may, in some instances,<br />
permit probation.<br />
Rather, the legislature has provided that if a person sent to prison for aggravated<br />
indecent solicitation of a child and then released commits any felony, he or she must be<br />
returned to prison for life without ever getting out again. That punishment is triggered not<br />
by the original crime but by a later felony that may be a comparatively minor property<br />
offense. The sentencing scheme effectively functions no differently from a statute<br />
requiring a sentence of life in prison without parole for anyone convicted of a felony if he<br />
37