Opinion ID: 2629174
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: The Defendant's Argument

Text: The defendant argues that resolution of this case hinges on whether incarceration in the county jail constitutes imprisonment under Kansas law, specifically under K.S.A. 21-4608(a). She contends that the Court of Appeals failed to address the distinction between the use of the terms confinement and imprisonment in the statues authorizing the punishment for misdemeanor and felony offenses. K.S.A. 21-4608(a) provides that [w]hen separate sentences of imprisonment for different crimes are imposed on a defendant. . . such sentences shall run concurrently or consecutively as the court directs. (Emphasis added.) According to the defendant, the term imprisonment is reserved for felony crimes involving incarceration in a facility operated by the Kansas Department of Corrections. Misdemeanor convictions call for confinement instead of imprisonment with incarceration in a jail instead of the Kansas Department of Corrections. For support, the defendant points to the following provisions of K.S.A. 2002 Supp. 21-4603d(a)(1): (a) Whenever any person has been found guilty of a crime, the court may adjudge any of the following: (1) Commit the defendant to the custody of the secretary of corrections if the current crime of conviction is a felony and the sentence presumes imprisonment, or the sentence imposed is a dispositional departure to imprisonment, or, if confinement is for a misdemeanor, to jail for the term provided by law. (Emphasis added.) Additionally, the defendant notes that while K.S.A. 21-4501 sets forth the terms of imprisonment for felony offenses, K.S.A. 2002 Supp. 21-4502(1) sets forth the terms of confinement for misdemeanor offenses. Consequently, the defendant argues that the reference to imprisonment in K.S.A. 21-4608(a) grants a trial court authority to impose consecutive sentences for felony convictions only.