State v. Rosales-Chavez

── State v. Rosales-Chavez ── Court: Court of Appeals of Kansas Date: June 05, 2026 Category: General NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION Nos. 128,458 128,459 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF KANSAS STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, v. CHRISTIAN ROSALES-CHAVEZ, Appellant. MEMORANDUM OPINION Appeal from Ford District Court; SIDNEY R. THOMAS, judge. Submitted without oral argument. Opinion filed June 5, 2026. Affirmed. Jacob Nowak, of Kansas Appellate Defender Office, for appellant. Steven J. Obermeier, assistant solicitor general, and Kris W. Kobach, attorney general, for appellee. Before GARDNER, P.J., MALONE and ATCHESON, JJ. PER CURIAM: After a consolidated disposition and sentencing hearing involving a probation violation case (22CR475) and a felony criminal case (24CR271), Christian Rosales-Chavez appeals the district court's denial of his request for new counsel. He claims the district court abused its discretion by its inquiry into his dissatisfaction with appointed counsel. Finding no error, we affirm. 1  FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY In February 2023, Rosales-Chavez pleaded guilty in 22CR475 to possession of cocaine with intent to distribute. After plea negotiations, the State agreed to dismiss charges of five other crimes. These charges included single felony counts of interference with law enforcement, aggravated endangering a child, possession of drug paraphernalia, and misdemeanor possession of marijuana and drug paraphernalia. The State also agreed to jointly recommend a dispositional departure. At a sentencing in May 2023, the district court granted the parties' joint request for a departure and sentenced Rosales-Chavez to 36 months of probation and a suspended term of 72 months' imprisonment. In assessing the 72-month term, the district court sentenced Rosales-Chavez to the aggravated sentence within the corresponding Kansas Sentencing Guidelines Act grid block. The court explained that it did this as an "additional incentive" for Rosales-Chavez to successfully complete his probation. But that proved challenging. Rosales-Chavez failed to report to a random urine analysis (UA), used cocaine, and failed a UA. For those violations of his probation terms and conditions, Rosales-Chavez served three two-day jail sanctions. In June 2024, the State moved to revoke Rosales-Chavez' probation for more violations. As alleged in the supporting affidavit by his probation officer, Rosales-Chavez failed to provide a UA, entered a club, failed to complete community service, and failed to observe curfew. The State filed an amended affidavit later the same month, alleging Rosales-Chavez had tested positive for THC. Rosales-Chavez denied use, but additional testing confirmed the positive results. So Rosales-Chavez' probation officer documented Rosales-Chavez' false denial. Rosales-Chavez later admitted to smoking marijuana again on June 22. 2  The district court then issued a warrant for Rosales-Chavez' arrest. But when law enforcement tried to execute the warrant, Rosales-Chavez ran from the officers. This resulted in a new criminal charge—24CR271—felony interference with law enforcement. The State filed a corresponding motion to revoke Rosales-Chavez' probation in 22CR475. Rosales-Chavez posted a $5,000 appearance bond for the probation violation and agreed to appear in court. As a condition of his bond, he agreed not to possess or consume any controlled substance, as was a condition of his probation. The district court appointed Louis Podrebarac to represent