IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS No. 111,904 STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, v. DONALDO MORALES, Appellant. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT Consistent with Kansas v. Garcia, 589 U.S. __, 140 S. Ct. 791, 206 L. Ed. 2d 146 (2020), a Kansas prosecution for identity theft or making false information based on information a defendant provides on employment forms, with the exception of the I-9 form, is not preempted by the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. Review of the judgment of the Court of Appeals in an unpublished opinion filed January 8, 2016. Appeal from Johnson District Court; KEVIN P. MORIARTY, judge. Opinion on remand filed June 12, 2020. Judgment of the Court of Appeals affirming the district court is affirmed. Judgment of the district court is affirmed. Randall L. Hodgkinson, of Kansas Appellate Defender Office, was on the brief for appellant. Steven J. Obermeier, senior deputy district attorney, Stephen M. Howe, district attorney, and Derek Schmidt, attorney general, were on the brief for appellee. The opinion of the court was delivered by 1 BEIER, J.: This case is on remand from the United States Supreme Court for further proceedings consistent with its opinion in Kansas v. Garcia, 589 U.S. __, 140 S. Ct. 791, 206 L. Ed. 2d 146 (2020). The factual and procedural details of the case are fully set out in our opinion in State v. Morales, 306 Kan. 1100, 401 P.3d 155 (2017), and will not be restated here. We reversed defendant Donaldo Morales' convictions on one count of identity theft and two counts of making a false information, holding that "[h]is prosecution based on his use of a Social Security number belonging to another person for employment was expressly preempted by 8 U.S.C. ยง 1324a(b)(5)." 306 Kan. at 1105. At a bench trial, a district court judge had found Morales guilty after denying Morales' motion to dismiss charges based on representations in Morales' W-4 employment form. Morales had argued that the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) preempted such prosecutions. The judge also denied Morales' post-trial motion for a new trial based on the same ground. On appeal, among other things, Morales asserted that IRCA preempted identity theft and making false information prosecutions not just based on the W-4 but any document, such as a K-4, an undocumented worker filled out when seeking employment. The Court of Appeals rejected this argument and affirmed his convictions. See State v. Morales, No. 111,904, 2016 WL 97848 (2016) (unpublished opinion). We disagreed and reversed both the Court of Appeals and district court, holding that IRCA preempted such prosecutions. The State filed a writ of certiorari in this case, as well as its companion cases, State v. Garcia, 306 Kan. 1113, 401 P.3d 588 (2017), and State v. Ochoa-Lara, 306 Kan. 2 1107, 401 P.3d 159 (2017), which the United States Supreme Court granted. In an opinion addressing all three cases, a majority of the Court held that that the state law prosecutions were ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals