Kansas Court of Appeals to hear divorce case among others

(AP images)
Published: Aug. 4, 2020 at 5:32 PM CDT
Email this link
Share on Pinterest
Share on LinkedIn

TOPEKA, Kan. (WIBW) - The Kansas Court of Appeals will hear a divorce case among others on its Aug. 12 docket.

The Kansas Court of Appeals says it will hear a divorce case among others on its August 12 docket via videoconference and oral arguments will be livestreamed on YouTube.

The Court says the presiding judge will be Judge Kim R. Schroeder and she will be joined by Judges Henry Green Jr. and Michael Buser.

The Court says it will hear Appeal No. 120,456: State of Kansas v. Boniface Wambutsi Wabuyabo, a Johnson County case where Wabuyabo was convicted by a jury of one count of reckless aggravated battery. It says on appeal, Wabuyabo claims the statement he made to law enforcement should have been suppressed due to never being advised of his Miranda rights. Wabuyabo also argues law enforcement used improperly coercive techniques to obtain a confession in violation of his constitutional rights.

According to the Court, it will also be hearing Appeal No. 121,060, State of Kansas v. Baltazar Guzman Ruiz, a Finney County case where a jury convicted Ruiz of possessing cocaine and driving under the influence. The Court says on appeal, Ruiz is arguing his convictions must be reversed due to the trial judge violating rights under the Fifth Amendment to the U.S. Consitution by making an improper comment about his decision not to testify. Ruiz also argues his cocaine possession conviction must be reversed due to the trial court providing the jury with a legally inappropriate instruction on the elements of cocaine possession.

Lastly, the Court says it will hear Appeal No. 121,350: Lara Van Asten v. Brian Van Asten, a Miami County case where a couple had been married three times over the span of two decades. It says the third marriage accounted for four years of the 20-year relationship. According to the Court, at trial, Brian argued the district court should only consider the third four-year marriage when dividing property and calculating the duration of spousal maintenance. It says ultimately, the district court divided marital property equally and ordered Brian to pay spousal maintenance for 35 months. It says Brian appealed, arguing the district court abused its discretion when interpreting Kansas precedent as creating a different legal standard for divorce actions here parties have remarried each other. Brian argues the district court’s interpretation resulted in an improper division of property and spousal maintenance calculation because it had considered the length of the parties’ 20-year relationship rather than the four-year length of the last marriage.

For more information on these cases visit the Kansas Court of Appeals website.

Copyright 2020 WIBW. All rights reserved.

Latest News

Latest News