Opinion ID: 3219387
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: standard of review

Text: When reviewing jury instructions for error, an appellate court first considers reviewability from jurisdiction and preservation viewpoints, which it does de novo. Next, the court exercises unlimited review to determine whether the instruction was legally appropriate. Then, it considers whether the evidence taken in the light most favorable to the defendant supports the instruction. And, finally, if there was error, the court determines whether it was harmless, using the test and degree of certainty set out in State v. Ward, 292 Kan. 541, 256 P.3d 801 (2011). State v. Moyer, 302 Kan. 892, 914-15, 360 P.3d 384 (2015). If, as here, the appellant failed to properly object to the instruction, the standard on appeal is whether the instruction was clearly erroneous. 302 Kan. at 915. To find clear error, the court must be firmly convinced the jury would have reached a different verdict absent the instructional error. See State v. Pfannenstiel, 302 Kan. 747, 753, 357 P.3d 877 (2015).