Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

280 Kan. 56

State v. Peterman

Supreme Court of Kansas

Decided September 9, 2005

Supreme Court of Kansas · decided 2005-09-09

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2005-09-09

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently June 2024

14 state decisions

100200520102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Allegrucci, J.,

¶1dissenting: I respectfully dissent from the majority of this court in reversing the Court of Appeals as to the attempted rape conviction. I agree with the majority of the Court of Appeals in finding insufficient evidence of an overt act.

¶2Although the Court of Appeals majority mentions the lack of a victim, its conclusion did not rest solely on that fact. Instead, the majority concluded that the State failed to establish attempted rape. The Court of Appeals stated:

“Obviously, Peterman’s intentions were morally reprehensible and disgusting. Nevertheless, it is not our role to be influenced by our sensibilities rather than the letter of the law. Unless and until our legislature proscribes a crime of‘intent and preparation to commit rape with a child,’ we must avoid the temptation to punish such conduct as attempted rape as currently defined and construed.”

¶3I agree. I would affirm the Court of Appeals’ decision affirming in part, reversing in part, and remanding to the district court.

/280/kan/56 · .json · Public domain