Graphic: Masthead for Washburn Law Journal (WLJ) Online.

Washburn Law Journal Online, Volume 57

Analyzing the Kansas Supreme Court’s Sweeping Prohibition of Identity Theft Prosecution Under Kansas State Law [State v. Garcia, 401 P.3d 588 (Kan. 2017)]

Curry P. Sexton | February 6, 2018 | PDF Version (78 KB)

Summary: The Kansas Supreme Court held that federal law and the Immigration Reform Control Act of 1986 expressly preempt Kansas identity theft prosecution of undocumented workers. The court erred by overtly interpreting federal law to satisfy its preemption analysis and dispose of the prosecution. The State should have unbridled authority to prosecute undocumented workers for crimes unrelated to illegal alien status.

Preferred Citation: Curry P. Sexton, Analyzing the Kansas Supreme Court's Sweeping Prohibition of Identity Theft Prosecution Under Kansas State Law, 57 Washburn L.J. Online 14 (2018), http://washburnlaw.edu/wljonline/sexton-identitytheft

Analyzing the Kansas Supreme Court’s Sweeping Prohibition of Identity Theft Prosecution Under Kansas State Law

Scrutinizing the Scope of Oklahoma’s Statutory Pugh Clause [Stephens Production Co. v. Tripco, Inc., 389 P.3d 365 (Okla. Civ. App. 2016)]

Ethan D. Thompson | January 23, 2018 | Read this Comment

Summary: The Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals held that the Oklahoma statutory Pugh Clause does not apply to a statutorily created unit because the Unitization Act addresses producing wells, while the Pugh Clause addresses pre-production leases. The court erred by failing to recognize that the purposes of both statutes are to prevent waste, and the court’s interpretation created opportunities for more waste.

Preferred Citation: Ethan D. Thompson, Scrutinizing the Scope of Oklahoma's Statutory Pugh Clause, 57 Washburn L.J. Online 8 (2018), http://washburnlaw.edu/wljonline/thompson-pughclause

Scrutinizing the Scope of Oklahoma's Statutory Pugh Clause

Unreasonable Suspicion: Kansas’s Adoption of the Owner-as-Driver Rule [State v. Glover, 400 P.3d 182 (Kan. Ct. App. 2017)]

Benjamin B. Donovan | January 23, 2018 | Read this Comment

Summary: The Kansas Court of Appeals adopted a bright-line rule that reasonable suspicion exists for a traffic stop when the vehicle's registered owner has a suspended license and the officer is unaware of evidence that the owner is not the driver. This rule fails to meet the reasonableness requirement of the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution.

Preferred Citation: Benjamin B. Donovan, Unreasonable Suspicion: Kansas’s Adoption of the Owner-as-Driver Rule, 57 Washburn L.J. Online 1 (2018), http://washburnlaw.edu/wljonline/donovan-ownerasdriverrule

Unreasonable Suspicion: Kansas’s Adoption of the Owner-as-Driver Rule

Cases Reviewed