State v. Littlejohn, 925 P.2d 839 (Kan. 1996). · Go Syfert
Search
State v. Littlejohn, 925 P.2d 839 (Kan. 1996). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
13 citation events (10 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: State v. Robinson (kan, 2018-06-29)
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see" State v. Robinson (2×)
Kan. · 2018 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Littlejohn , 260 Kan. 821 , 822, 925 P.2d 839 (1996) ; State v. Thomas , 239 Kan. 457 , 462, 720 P.2d 1059 (1986) ; State v. Myrick & Nelms , 228 Kan. 406 , 416, 616 P.2d 1066 (1980).
discussed Cited "see" State v. Potts (2×)
Kan. · 2016 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Littlejohn, 260 Kan. 821, 822 , 925 P.2d 839 (1996); Thomas, 239 Kan. at 462 . 11 Potts' sufficiency argument fails to account for direct and circumstantial evidence that the jury could have relied on to conclude that he intended to aid his companions with the shooting at its very beginning.
discussed Cited "see" State v. Potts (2×)
Kan. · 2016 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Littlejohn, 260 Kan. 821, 822 , 925 P.2d 839 (1996); Thomas, 239 Kan. at 462 .
discussed Cited "see" State v. Dupree (2×)
Kan. · 2016 · signal: see · confidence high
See State v. Littlejohn, 260 Kan. 821, 822 , 925 P.2d 839 (1996); Thomas, 239 Kan. at 462 .
cited Cited "see" Littlejohn v. McKune
10th Cir. · 2000 · signal: see · confidence high
See Kansas v. Littlejohn, 925 P.2d 839, 840 (Kan. 1996).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
State of Kansas
v.
Brian K. Littlejohn
No. 74,485.
Supreme Court of Kansas.
Oct 25, 1996.
925 P.2d 839
Thomas Jacquinot, special appellate defender, argued the cause, and Jessica R Kunen, chief appellate defender, was with him on the brief for appellant., Thomas J. Schultz, assistant district attorney, argued the cause, and Ñola Fouls-ton, district attorney, and Carla J. Stovall, attorney general, were with him on the brief for appellee.
Abbott.
Cited by 6 opinions  |  Published

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Abbott, J.:

This is an appeal by the defendant, Brian K. Little-john, from the denial of his motion to determine status, nunc pro tunc. In 1981, Littlejohn participated in a robbery. The robbery victim was killed during the course of the robbery. Littlejohn was convicted of attempted aggravated robbery and first-degree felony murder. These convictions were affirmed by this court in an unpublished opinion filed in 1982. Littlejohn also filed a motion for a new trial, which was denied, and the denial was affirmed in State v. Littlejohn, 236 Kan. 497, 694 P.2d 403 (1984).

In this case, Littlejohn requested that the journal entry of his convictions be altered to indicate, in accordance with K.S.A. 21-4620(a)(2)(C), that he had only been convicted as an aider or abettor, not as a principal, in the 1981 case. The trial court denied this motion based on State v. Thomas, 239 Kan. 457, 720 P.2d 1059 (1986).

Littlejohn concedes that for him to be successful on appeal, this court must overrule or modify State v. Thomas. Interestingly enough, Thomas’ convictions and appeal arose out of the same attempted robbery and murder as Littlejohn’s convictions. It ap[*822] pears to be without question that Thomas is the one who fired the fatal shots during the attempted robbery.

In Thomas, Justice Lockett, writing for the court, held: “In a felony-murder case, evidence of who die triggerman [was] is irrelevant and all participants are principals.” 239 Kan. at 462 (citing State v. Myrick & Nelms, 228 Kan. 406, 416, 616 P.2d 1066 [1980]). He went on to say that even though Thomas may have fired the fatal shots, “a participant in a felony murder cannot be an aider [or] abettor.” 239 Kan. at 462.

In summary, this court held in the Thomas case that a participant in a felony murder cannot be an aider or abettor and should not be identified as a aider or abettor on a judgment form.

We decline to reverse or modify our holding in State v. Thomas.

Affirmed.