Importantly, one of the purposes of the guidelines is to ensure public safety. Using a history of unpunished sexual exploitation as a factor to justify a departure is consistent with the purposes of the guidelines. The substantial and compelling reason to support the departure in Zuck was based upon previous uncharged but similar conduct of the defendant with the victim. In the case now on appeal, the district court's findings are limited to the inherent facts of each crime of conviction with the conclusion then drawn that the sum of the parts is greater than the whole. Multiple convictions are specifically addressed in K.S.A. 21-4720.
Judges generally have discretion to impose consecutive or concurrent sentences.
More significantly, the legislature has specifically considered the impact of multiple convictions in determining an offender's criminal history under K.S.A. 21-4710. In fact, until amended in 1995, K.S.A. 21-4710 required that the multiple convictions be scored in determining criminal history. Based upon the above provisions of the KSGA and the purposes and objectives of sentencing guidelines, we conclude that a pattern of exploitative conduct based exclusively upon the inherent facts of the multiple crimes of conviction is not a substantial and compelling reason for a sentencing departure under K.S.A. 21-4716. Upon remand, the district court is not precluded from considering additional, appropriate reasons that would justify the imposition of a departure sentence. 25 Kan. App.