In State v. Johnson, No. 105,598, the Kansas Court of appeals decided a matter of first impression in Kansas. Johnson was convicted in the district court of aggravated battery (the latter via aiding and abetting), when she seemingly encouraged a man she had picked up at a bar to injure her paramour for a perceived indiscretion. Johnson was not present when the aggravated battery occurred, nor did she actually transport anyone to the location of the battery. In the light most favorable to the prosecution, her only involvement was to tell her paramour of the indiscretion, ask him to “take care of it,” and give directions to the victim’s house.

On appeal, the Kansas Court of Appeals had to determine whether K.S.A. 21-3205 (aiding and abetting statute) provides alternative means. At its core, an alternative means statute is one that can be broken in several different ways. For example, the same law might make it a crime to both possess and possess with intent to distribute a controlled substance. A person can break that law by either possession OR possessing with intent to distribute the controlled substance. Doing either one of those things is a violation of the law. To be fair to the defendant in a criminal case, the prosecution must either 1) elect which of the alternative means it wishes to prove or 2) allow the court to instruct the jury that they must be unanimous in the particular mean in which the statute was violated.

But the Kansas Court of Appeals held that the aiding and abetting statute was not an alternative means statute. The terms “aids,” “abets,” “advises,” “hires,” “counsels,” and “procures” do not entail materially different or distinct ways of committing a particular crime. The Court described these words as “various examples” rather than alternative means…and that “it is not the precise characterization of a person’s actions but rather his/her purpose in undertaking such actions that is of import.”

An aider and abettor is typically guilty of the same crime as the person who actually commits the crime. But what actually constitutes aiding and abetting is not always certain. In this case, the appellate court had an opportunity to clarify what actions will trigger a violation of the law but chose not to do so.

If you’ve been charged with a crime and don’t know where to turn, contact the experienced criminal defense attorneys at Bell Folsom, P.A. today.