Arguments made before the Kansas Supreme Court in State v. Jonathan Carr and State v. Reginald Carr

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
January 28, 2026

WICHITA, Kan. — To understand the arguments made before the Kansas Supreme Court today, January 28, 2026, in State v. Jonathan Carr and State v. Reginald Carr, please review the following summary:

In 2000, the Office of the District Attorney, 18th Judicial District, charged Jonathan Carr and charged Reginald Carr each with 8 counts of Capital murder. This was based on the argument that the crime of capital murder could be proven in either of two ways, as to each of the 4 people killed on December 14, 2000, in Wichita, Kansas:

• First, a murder that occurred during the course of a rape or aggravated criminal sodomy; and Second, a murder that occurred during the course of the death of at least two others.

For example, as to Heather Muller, Judge Clark instructed the jury as follows:

• Ct 1: Capital Murder: That Heather Muller was a victim of rape and/or aggravated criminal sodomy, and such killing was done in the commission of or subsequent to such rape and/or aggravated criminal sodomy; or
• Ct 2: Capital Murder: That the premeditated and intentional of Heather Muller and the killing of Brad Heyka, Jason Befort and Aaron Sanders was a part of the same act or a part of two or more acts connected together or constituting parts of a common scheme or course of conduct;

During the “guilt phase” of the trial, the Judge then instructed the jury in this manner regarding each victim. In other words, counts 3 & 4 as to Aaron Sanders, counts 5 and 6 as to Brad Heyka and counts 7 and 8 as to Jason Befort.

The jury convicted both men of all 8 counts during the “guilt phase” of the trial.

Then, at the “penalty phase” of the trial, since the two defendants had already been convicted of both ways of committing capital murder for each of the 4 people killed, and guilt was no longer an issue, Judge Clark, instructed the jury on capital murder by referring to a single number for each victim. In other words:

• Count 1 and Count 2 in the guilt phase as to Heather Muller – became Count 1 in the penalty-phase;
• Count 3 and Count 4 in the guilt phase as to Aaron Sander – became Count 2 in the penalty-phase;
• Count 5 and Count 6 in the guilt phase as to Brad Heyka – became Count 3 in the penalty-phase;
• Count 7 and Count 8 in the guilt phase as to Jason Befort – became Count 4 in the penalty-phase.

The jury then determined that the aggravating circumstances were not outweighed by mitigating and sentenced both men to death on all 4 counts.

Later, in its first review of the case, the Kansas Supreme Court ruled (in what the lawyers today called “Carr I”) ruled on July 15, 2014, that the guilt of both men was affirmed as an overall issue, but they did overturn certain counts.

Among the conclusions that the Kansas Supreme Court reached in this opinion was that it set aside (overturned) the state’s theory of Capital Murder that had been charged in Counts 1, 3, 5 and 7. In other words, the Court overturned the convictions based on a murder committed during the course of a rape or aggravated criminal sodomy.

Additionally, the Kansas Supreme Court said that there can NOT be multiple capital murder convictions when multiple people are killed. Instead, there is a single capital murder that accounts for all the people killed. The Kansas Supreme Court held that the one count of capital murder that would stand then would be Count 2 as was originally charged and which the jury convicted in the guilt phase of the trial:

• Ct 2: Capital Murder: That the premeditated and intentional of Heather Muller and the killing of Brad Heyka, Jason Befort and Aaron Sanders was a part of the same act or a part of two or more acts connected together or constituting parts of a common scheme or course of conduct;

Finally – and this really has nothing to do with the arguments today but is included here to keep the order of events clear – the Kansas Supreme Court decided in that same 2014 decision (Carr I) that the death sentence was overturned. Later, on January 20, 2016, the United States Supreme Court overturned THAT decision of the Kansas Supreme Court to set aside the death penalty and said the death penalty was upheld and “re-instated” that sentence.

Today:

The defense’s argument today was that when Judge Clark announced the death sentence, he did so using the numbering system he’d used in the penalty phase. In other words,

• Count 1 and Count 2 – as to Heather Muller became Count 1;
• Count 3 and Count 4 – as to Aaron Sander, became Count 2;
• Count 5 and Count 6 – as to Brad Heyka became Count 3;
• Count 7 and 8 – as to Jason Befort became Count 4.

Since the Kansas Supreme Court had said back in 2014 that the one good (upheld/sustained) count of Capital murder was Count 2 regarding Heather Muller – and that the capital murder counts that named Aaron, Brad and Jason as the first named victim were overturned – the defense argued that when Judge Clark imposed a death penalty, his reference to “Count 2” referred to Aaron Sanders and not Heather Muller. Therefore, they argued that there has been no valid death
sentence imposed. As a result, the defense argued that the state should have to empanel a new jury, call witnesses and have a new “penalty stage.”

The State’s argument made by Boyd Isherwood today was that it is actually clear what Judge Clark did, and it is equally clear what the Kansas Supreme Court meant in 2014. The State argued that the Supreme Court upheld the conviction for capital murder charged in Count 2 as to Heather Muller (and Aaron Sanders, Brad Heyka and Jason Befort) and when judge imposed the death penalty on what he called Count 1 in the penalty phase – it was simply a reference to the capital
murder of Heather Muller. As such, both men have in fact been sentenced to death on the capital murder conviction that was upheld back in 2014.