• Sep 18, 2013
  • The Wichita Eagle
  • -
  • by Tim Potter and Stan Finger

Prosecutors have dismissed charges against a Sedgwick County detention deputy accused of fondling two male inmates. The district attorney and the sheriff said it’s possible that charges could be re-filed.

In November 2012, prosecutors charged James Conklin, 54, with two counts of unlawful sexual relations, both felonies. The charges accused him of “lewd fondling” of two inmates in September and October of 2012. In the past, authorities said that the charges involved incidents at the work release center; according to the charges, the alleged victims were jail inmates.

One of the charges was dismissed in July and the other on Sept. 10, court records show.

In a statement Wednesday, Conklin’s defense attorney, Sal Intagliata said: “James Conklin honorably served his department and his community for almost 20 years as a deputy jailer. He and his family appreciate the willingness of the District Attorney’s Office to listen and review his case closely and on its own. We are most thankful for that office’s decision to dismiss the case. It was the right decision.”

Later, Intagliata added: “We continue to maintain that James Conklin did not commit these offenses.”

In a statement, District Attorney Marc Bennett said that the case against Conklin “was dismissed because a key witness is in custody in another jurisdiction and is unavailable to testify. The case was dismissed without prejudice which means it can be re-filed at a later time.”

Sheriff Jeff Easter said an alleged victim in the case is in a federal penitentiary and can’t get to Wichita to testify. When that person is available to testify, it’s possible the charges could be refiled, Easter said.

Conklin remains on unpaid suspension, and he has filed for retirement, Easter said.

“We are conducting an internal investigation” into the circumstances that led to the charges, Easter said.

That internal investigation had to wait until the criminal case was completed, he said.

Conklin was the second deputy within a year to be charged with sex crimes against inmates. Former Sedgwick County detention Deputy David Kendall is still facing multiple charges, ranging from aggravated sodomy to misdemeanor sexual battery.

Read full story at Kansas.com

The Wichita Eagle – By Tim Potter and Stan Finger

  • Sep 13, 2013
  • Monnat & Spurrier

For the second time, Best Lawyers has named Dan Monnat, of Monnat & Spurrier, Chartered, a Wichita Lawyer of the Year. In 2012, Monnat earned the distinction specifically for his white-collar criminal defense work. This year, Monnat has been recognized for his success in other criminal cases as the 2014 Wichita Criminal Defense: Non-White-Collar Lawyer of the Year. 

Monnat has been honored by The Best Lawyers in America® for 26 consecutive years.  For this 2014 edition, Monnat is listed in the fields of criminal defense; white-collar criminal defense; and appellate defense. Selection is based on a confidential, nationwide peer survey that rates attorneys on professional competency, legal scholarship, pro bono service, and achievement.

“For more than a quarter of a century, I’ve been honored to be recognized among this revered group of lawyers,” Monnat said. “Every day, they make our American justice system stronger by upholding the principles of the Constitution and protecting liberty for all of us,” Monnat said.

Monnat has practiced in Wichita for more than 36 years. A graduate of California State University, Monnat received his J.D. from Creighton University School of Law and is a graduate of Gerry Spence’s Trial Lawyer’s College.

A frequent national lecturer and editorial contributor on criminal defense topics, Monnat is the author of “Sentencing, Probation, and Collateral Consequences,” a chapter of the Kansas Bar Association’s Kansas Criminal Law Handbook, 4th edition. Appointed by then-Governor Kathleen Sebelius, Monnat served on the Kansas Sentencing Commission from 2007 – 2012.

Chosen in 2002 as a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers, Monnat currently sits on the Kansas Association of Justice’ Board of Editors and is the Criminal Law Chair. He has also been designated a Fellow of the International Academy of Trial Lawyers, Litigation Counsel of America and the Kansas Bar Foundation.

Monnat served as a member of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers Board of Directors from 1996 – 2004, and is a two-term past president of the Kansas Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers.

  • Sep 12, 2013
  • KSN TV
  • -
  • by Laura McMillan

DERBY, Kansas — Derby High School already has random drug testing. Add the AlcoBlow to the list.

“They blow onto the end of the wand and it has three indicators to see if they’ve been drinking,” says Derby High Principal Tim Hamblin. “We are doing this. It’s already been deployed at the first football game. We have two.”

“Teenage drinking happens. I’m not about to believe that does not go on at Derby High School or any other school in the USA. But with drinking, sometimes, bad things can happen. The consequences can be life-altering or the tragic loss of life.”

Derby says it will only use the “AlcoBlow” system on a student, if someone comes forward and states a student may be drinking or intoxicated.

“We won’t be roaming the stands at games,” says Hamblin.

The idea is met with mixed reviews from students, who wonder if the idea is a good one.

“It’s kind of yes and no,” says Derby Junior Courtney Anderson. “If you’re not doing it (drinking) then you shouldn’t worry at all. ”

“It’s known. Teenagers do drink,” says student Jackson Howard. “In some circumstances I think it would be necessary if you know they are intoxicated at a sporting event like that.”

Mixed reviews. But, is it legal?

Law analysts say rights of students have been through the courts when it comes to students and drug and alcohol testing.

“Maybe the bigger question here is how will the school do this?” asks legal analyst and Wichita attorney Dan Monnat. “Might we find that a disproportionate number of students with face metal and tattoos are being tested? Or, might we find that a disproportionate number of students who wear hoodies are being tested? The school has to be very careful to administer such constitutionally permissible procedures as these in a non-discriminatory manner.”

Some parents are onboard, saying it’s a good idea.

“I think it’s a good thing,” says parent Sean Larson. “It will keep our kids responsible and let them know there is some consequences for that.”

School leaders say they will be judicial in their use of the AlcoBlow device.

“If there is a positive test, we will call the police,” says Hamblin. “Teen drinking is just not legal. Also, we will not test a suspected student in public. They will be pulled aside and two administrators will view the procedure.”

If a students tests positive, and the subsequent police breathalyzer test confirms the AlcoBlow test, there could be a student suspension.

The system is already in use, and will be available for all extra-curricular activities. There are no plans to have parents tested.

See video at KSN

KSN TV – By Laura McMillan

  • Aug 20, 2013
  • The Wichita Eagle
  • -
  • by Tim Potter and Amy Renee Leiker

A Derby man’s sex crime against a 5-year-old boy was unrelated to a youth soccer program the man had coordinated, the child’s mother said Thursday.

The woman said her son is a relative of the man, identified by authorities as Leon James Knabe, 57.

From what she knows of the investigation, Knabe is not suspected of other crimes, she said. To protect the identity of her child, The Eagle is not naming her.

The District Attorney’s Office announced Wednesday that Knabe had been sentenced that afternoon to almost three years in prison after pleading guilty to aggravated indecent solicitation of a 5-year-old boy. After his release from prison, Knabe must register as a sex offender for the rest of his life, the office said.

The DA’s office also said Knabe is a former coordinator of youth soccer for his Derby church.

On Thursday, district attorney spokesman Dan Dillon, responding to questions from The Eagle about Knabe’s church role, said the victim was not a member of the church-affiliated soccer teams. Dillon said that Knabe knew the victim.

Also Thursday, Knabe’s defense attorney, Trevor Riddle, said: “The allegations against Mr. Knabe in this case had nothing to do, nor any connection, with his church nor with his participation in any church activities.

“This case is now resolved, and we would ask everyone to respect the privacy of those involved,” Riddle said, declining to comment further.

Knabe had been arrested and originally charged with aggravated indecent liberties with a child, a crime that can be prosecuted under Jessica’s Law, leading to a mandatory life sentence without parole for 25 years. The original charge accused him of “lewd fondling or touching” of the boy around Oct. 12. But in June, shortly before his trial, Knabe accepted a plea deal for a less serious felony crime — aggravated indecent solicitation, which is enticing or persuading a child to commit a sex act, according to court documents.

The prosecutor discussed the plea with the boy’s family, and “we were satisfied with the plea agreement,” the boy’s mother said Thursday.

She said the crime and fallout have “been very difficult on the family, but we have all handled it.”

Her child is doing well, she said.

“We’re grateful to the Wichita Area Sexual Assault Center,” which has provided free therapy, she said.

On Aug. 6, Knabe’s attorney, Riddle, filed a document in court arguing for probation, describing Knabe as a “doting husband, loving father, devoted church member, and trusted friend. He also comes before this Court a humbled and remorseful man.”

Knabe has a bachelor’s degree in mechanical engineering and had been employed at the same engineering business since 1993, the attorney said.

Read full story at Kansas.com

The Wichita Eagle – By Tim Potter and Amy Renee Leiker

  • Jun 13, 2013
  • Monnat & Spurrier

WICHITA, Kan. – Dan Monnat, of Monnat & Spurrier, Chartered, has been listed by Chambers USA 2013 as one of Kansas’ most notable litigators.  According to the publication’s editorial report, Monnat “is hailed as a really good criminal defense attorney… and recognized as a talented trial and appellate lawyer.”

Lawyers are independently researched by Chambers USA. Rankings are based on legal ability, client service, business acumen, diligence, professional conduct and pre-eminence in the attorney’s key practice area in the past year.

Monnat has practiced in Wichita for more than 36 years.  A graduate of California State University, Monnat received his J.D. from Creighton University School of Law.  He also is a graduate of Gerry Spence’s Trial Lawyer’s College.

A frequent national lecturer and editorial contributor on criminal defense topics, Monnat is the author of “Sentencing, Probation, and Collateral Consequences,” a chapter of the Kansas Bar Association’s Kansas Criminal Law Handbook, 4th edition.  He was a member of the Kansas Sentencing Commission from 2007 – 2011.

Monnat has earned distinction as a Fellow of the American College of Trial Lawyers, the International Academy of Trial Lawyers, and the Litigation Counsel of America.  He currently sits on the Kansas Association of Justice’s Board of Editors and is the Criminal Law Chair.

Monnat is a member of the National Trial Lawyers and served as a member of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers Board of Directors from 1996 – 2004.  He is a two-term past president of the Kansas Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and a member of the Nebraska Criminal Defense Attorneys Association.

  • Jun 12, 2013
  • Kansas.com

Former Garden Plain football coach Todd Puetz, who was facing a possible sentence of five years in prison for electronic solicitation of a minor, has avoided jail time by reaching a plea agreement with prosecutors.

Puetz pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor count of patronizing a prostitute and was given a 30-day suspended sentence by District Judge Ben Burgess. Puetz was not required to appear in court when Burgess signed the agreement on Friday.

Puetz was one of seven men arrested in October 2011 during a Wichita police sting that targeted men willing to pay to have sex with underage girls.

A Sedgwick County jury found Puetz not guilty in April of attempted aggravated indecent liberties with a child and attempted criminal sodomy. But the jury was unable to reach a verdict on the third and most serious count: electronic solicitation of a child under 16. Puetz faced a possible sentence of 55 to 61 months in prison on that charge.

During the trial, the jury heard recordings of several calls Puetz made to a phone being answered by an undercover police detective posing as a 15-year-old prostitute. Puetz testified that he innocently called the number looking for a massage after seeing an ad that the detective had placed on the backpage.com Internet website.

Burgess, the trial judge, declared a mistrial on the third count, and the case was placed back on the jury trial docket. The retrial was scheduled to begin June 24.

When asked why the agreement was reached, District Attorney Marc Bennett issued a statement through a spokesman that said, “After a lengthy discussion with law enforcement and careful consideration, the parties arrived at this appropriate resolution.”

Defense lawyer Dan Monnat said he was limited in what he could say about the case.

“After a great deal of consideration, all parties agree this is an appropriate resolution,” he said. “We are grateful to the Sedgwick County district attorney and the jury for permitting this resolution of the case.”

Of the seven men charged in the sting operation, it appears that only one will face prison time. The case against one of the seven was dismissed by prosecutors and another suspect was found not guilty by a jury. Puetz and three other defendants accepted plea agreements that allowed them to plead guilty to misdemeanor charges and avoid prison time. The seventh defendant pleaded guilty to a felony and is awaiting sentencing. That final plea agreement also involved an unrelated case that accused the defendant of soliciting sex from a child under 14 through an Internet chat room.
Read full story at Kansas.com

  • Jun 04, 2013
  • Monnat & Spurrier

The Wichita Business Journal today announces its annual 40 Under 40 winners, and — as usual — they’re an outstanding bunch.

“The caliber was very high. It was a tough decision on many,” says one of the judges, Patrick Harbert, executive vice president-community markets for Equity Bank and a 2007 40 Under 40 honoree.

A defining characteristic of the winners?

“As a group, even though they have high-paced, very busy jobs, the community service and community involvement that all the applicants had” was impressive, Harbert says. “It makes living in Wichita something to be proud of.”

Wichita Business Journal Publisher John Ek said the roughly 300 nominees and 169 participants were both record numbers.

“I’m surprised and pleased that the 40 Under 40 program continues to grow and thrive,” Ek says.

This year also marked the largest number of honorees from one organization, with six from Koch Industries Inc. or its affiliates.

Harbert called the judging process fascinating.

“The 40 Under 40 has become an honor to earn it,” he says. “Unlike other communities, I think that’s really neat about Wichita. People want to be honored and be one of the 40 Under 40.”

Harbert remembers the feeling when he was chosen six years ago.

“One, it was an honor just to be recognized,” he says. “And two, it made me feel like all my hard work and accomplishments, people had noticed it. That was the neatest thing.”

This year’s winners represent a good cross-section of industry, including from marketing, finance, real estate, startups, the whole gamut, Harbert says.

Other judges and past 40 Under 40 winners were: Chris Wolgamott, Meritrust Credit Union, Class of 2010; Kara Hunt, The Arnold Group, Class of 2009; and Laura Fent, Hinkle Law Firm LLC, Class of 2010.

  • Jun 04, 2013
  • The Wichita Eagle
  • -
  • by Fred Mann

WASHINGTON — Police may take DNA samples from people arrested for serious crimes, the Supreme Court ruled Monday in a 5-4 decision.

The federal government and 28 states authorize the practice, and law enforcement officials say it is a valuable tool for investigating unsolved crimes. But the court said the testing was justified by a different reason: to identify the suspect in custody.

“When officers make an arrest supported by probable cause to hold for a serious offense and they bring the suspect to the station to be detained in custody,” Justice Anthony M. Kennedy wrote for the majority, “taking and analyzing a cheek swab of the arrestee’s DNA is, like fingerprinting and photographing, a legitimate police booking procedure that is reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.”

Justice Antonin Scalia summarized his dissent from the bench, a rare move signaling deep disagreement. He accused the majority of an unsuccessful sleight of hand, one that “taxes the credulity of the credulous.” The point of DNA testing as it is actually practiced, he said, is to solve cold cases, not to identify the suspect in custody.

But the Fourth Amendment forbids searches without reasonable suspicion to gather evidence about an unrelated crime, he said, a point the majority did not dispute.

“Make no mistake about it: Because of today’s decision, your DNA can be taken and entered into a national database if you are ever arrested, rightly or wrongly, and for whatever reason,” Scalia said from the bench.

Kansas Attorney Gen. Derek Schmidt, who had joined a brief arguing in support of the ruling, hailed it.

“Like fingerprinting, post-arrest DNA swabbing is a vital tool that identifies offenders, solves crimes and keeps Kansas safe,” he said in a written statement.

Dan Monnat, a Wichita defense attorney, said the decision represents “the brave new digital and genetic world we live in.”

“It states that presumptively innocent arrestees can have their most intimate genetic information harvested by the police just because they’re arrested,” Monnat said. “The dissent of Scalia may be most apt in recognizing that it burdens most the people for whom the Fourth Amendment ought to be most zealously guarded, that is, people who turn out to be innocent of what they’re arrested for.”

Existing Kansas law allows law enforcement to draw blood to collect DNA samples from people who are jailed before they are released. Legislative efforts this spring to allow cheek swabs when people are booked and fingerprinted after arrest on felony crimes were unsuccessful.

The case featured an alignment of justices that scrambled the usual ideological alliances. Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Clarence Thomas, Stephen G. Breyer and Samuel A. Alito Jr. joined the majority opinion while Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan joined Scalia’s dissent.

Monday’s ruling arose from the collection of DNA in 2009 from Alonzo Jay King Jr. after his arrest on assault charges in Wicomico County, Md. His DNA profile, obtained by swabbing his cheek, matched evidence from a 2003 rape case, and he was convicted of that crime.

The Maryland Court of Appeals ruled that a state law authorizing DNA collection from people arrested but not yet convicted violated the Fourth Amendment’s prohibition of unreasonable searches.

Kennedy, writing for the majority, said the “quick and painless” swabbing procedure was a search under the Fourth Amendment, meaning it had to be justified as reasonable under the circumstances. The search was reasonable, he said, given “the need for law enforcement officers in a safe and accurate way to process and identify the persons and possessions they must take into custody.”

Such identification, he said, “is no different than matching an arrestee’s face to a wanted poster of a previously unidentified suspect; or matching tattoos to known gang members to reveal a criminal affiliation; or matching the arrestee’s fingerprints to those recovered from a crime scene.”

The information retrieved through DNA testing as performed by law enforcement officials is limited, Kennedy wrote, and whether “the testing at issue in this case reveals any private medical information at all is open to dispute.”

In dissent, Scalia wrote the identification was not the point of the testing. King’s identity was thoroughly established before the DNA testing, Scalia said, as officials had his full name, race, sex, height, weight, date of birth and address.

Moreover, the testing took months to complete, he added.

Nor was there a serious dispute about the purpose of the Maryland law under review, he wrote. The law said one purpose of the testing was “as part of an official investigation into a crime.”

Roberts, in staying the state court decision while the Supreme Court considered the case, acknowledged that the law “provides a valuable tool for investigating unsolved crimes and thereby helping to remove violent offenders from the general population.”

The law authorized testing for purposes of identification, Scalia wrote, but only for missing people and human remains. It said nothing about identifying arrestees.

“Solving crimes is a noble objective,” Scalia concluded, “but it occupies a lower place in the American pantheon of noble objectives than the protection of our people from suspicionless law-enforcement searches. The Fourth Amendment must prevail.”

After King was convicted of assault, there would have been no Fourth Amendment violation had his DNA been collected and tested, Scalia wrote.

“So the ironic result of the court’s error is this: The only arrestees to whom the outcome here will ever make a difference are those who have been acquitted of the crimes of arrest.”

Contributing: Fred Mann of The Eagle
Read full article at Kansas.com

The Wichita Eagle – Fred Mann, contributing

  • May 31, 2013
  • Monnat & Spurrier

WICHITA, Kan. – The Wichita Business Journal has named Monnat & Spurrier, Chartered attorney Jon McConnell among its 40 Under 40 honorees for 2013. Roughly 300 individuals were nominated for this year’s honor, according to Wichita Business Journal Publisher John Ek. The selection committee reviews professional achievements as well as community involvement.

“We are extremely proud of Jon and applaud his dedication to our clients and his devotion to making our community a better place to live and work,” said firm president Dan Monnat.

Besides working full-time as a criminal defense attorney to protect the rights of those accused, McConnell volunteered countless hours to community causes, including:

  • Campaign Manager for Austin Henry’s 2013 American Diabetes Association – Father of the Year Campaign, which has raised more than $20,000 for the local chapter of the American Diabetes Association.
  • 2013 Bachelor for the Make-A-Wish Foundation’s Annual “Bid for Bachelors’ Charity Auction.”
  • 2013 Law Day Speaker for Curtis Middle School – Juvenile Law and the Constitution.
  • First Runner-Up for the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society’s Man of the Year 2012, raising more than $21,000 for the cause.  McConnell organized six large events and a benefit “Rock The Cure” concert to raise money for the organization.
  • Actively involved with the Midian Shrine Temple in raising funds for the 22 non-profit Shriners Hospitals for Children, through the Annual Shrine Circus and other fundraising events.
  • Volunteer for Hillside Christian Church, working with the High School Youth and the Property Committee.

McConnell has both a bachelor’s and a master’s degree in criminal justice from Wichita State University, where he took several opportunities to study abroad.  Through a cooperative program between WSU and the New Scotland Yard, he studied international law in the United Kingdom.  He also studied Spanish and Mexican culture through the WSU Summer Program in Puebla, Mexico.

A graduate of St. Thomas University School of Law in Miami, Fla., McConnell is a former law clerk for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit Court of Florida in Fort Lauderdale.

McConnell is licensed to practice before the federal and state courts in Kansas.  He is a member of the Wichita Bar Association, Kansas Bar Association and American Bar Association, as well as the Kansas Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys and the National Association of Criminal Defense Attorneys.

Monnat & Spurrier, Chartered, was founded 28 years ago by Monnat and legal scholar Stan Spurrier.  The firm has six attorneys and focuses on criminal defense, white-collar criminal defense, and appellate defense in municipal, state and federal courts.

  • May 27, 2013
  • The Wichita Eagle
  • -
  • by Amy Renee Leiker

Authorities say it’s still unclear whether charges will be filed against a teen who discarded her newborn in the trash earlier this year.

Wichita Police Lt. Randy Reynolds said the case remains under investigation, more than four months after the infant girl’s body was found by officers Jan. 16 in a dumpster at Eastgate Shopping Center, 8125 E. Kellogg.

Whether the full-term, 6-pound, 10-ounce girl was born alive and what caused her death could not be determined by the coroner, according to an autopsy report filed late last month in Sedgwick County District Court. The examination “revealed no evidence of trauma or natural disease” and no conclusive sign the infant had drawn a breath.

The teen told authorities the infant was stillborn, police said in January.

Reynolds said the agency is awaiting analysis of “additional pieces of information” before presenting the case to District Attorney Marc Bennett’s office. He would not discuss what the information was but said the agency hoped to turn the facts of the case over to prosecutors, who will decide whether to file charges, sometime during the next few weeks. Authorities continue to investigate the case as a “suspicious death,” he said.

Speaking broadly of death investigations, Reynolds said a coroner’s report is “just a piece of the pie” used to present a case to the district attorney’s office for review and possible charging — “but it’s not the end all.”

“We have cases that are undetermined in the cause (of death) and we develop additional information” and file charges later, he said.

Police in January discovered the baby’s body after her mother, a 17-year-old, was taken to Wesley Medical Center with severe hemorrhaging. After being questioned by hospital staff, the teen revealed she had given birth six days earlier at her south Wichita home and placed the baby in a trash bag. The bag was then thrown in the mall dumpster by a family member who didn’t know of its contents, police have said.

A plastic bag holding a placenta accompanied the infant’s body to the Sedgwick County Regional Forensic Science Center, where autopsies are performed, according to the coroner’s report. A light blue, twin-sized blanket spotted with small yellow stains on one side arrived later, tucked in a brown paper bag.

Police have said they think the teen’s parents were unaware of the pregnancy. Police also think her boyfriend, then 18, is the infant’s father.

The teen is not being named by The Eagle because charges have not been filed.

Local criminal defense lawyer Dan Monnat said while it’s possible charges could be filed against the teen mother or others, “any would suffer from the autopsy’s failure to determine whether the infant was born alive.”

“When you have an autopsy report that comes back that fails to attribute the death to criminal means, it’s kind of hard to charge anyone with any kind of homicide crime,” said Monnat, who practices throughout the Midwest.

“The death of a baby or child is always a shocking a tragic event and it’s natural to want to point fingers and assign blame. But babies and children are fragile and might just as easily be the victims of freak accidents as intentional wrongdoing.”

See full article at Kansas.com

The Wichita Eagle – By Amy Renee Leiker