Lawyer: Offender’s supervision inadequate

Prosecutors seek to revoke probation in 2003 sex assault

A defense attorney said “someone dropped the ball” in supervising a mentally disabled man who was ordered to probation for having sex with a 13-year-old girl in a high-profile 2003 case.

Prosecutors want to revoke the probation of 29-year-old Michael J. Rayton, alleging he repeatedly violated curfew and skipped appointments during a one-year probation period.

But in a hearing Friday in District Court, defense attorney James Rumsey asked a judge for more time to investigate the kind of mental health help Rayton did or didn’t receive while on probation.

According to testimony, Rayton functions at roughly a third-grade level and has an I.Q. of between 61 and 75.

He was supposed to apply to live in a group home as a condition of probation, but there was no space available with Cottonwood Inc., and he was put on a waiting list, Rumsey said. He said he thinks Rayton then slipped through the cracks among local mental health agencies.

Rumsey said there was “a breakdown in having somebody essentially shepherd him” through the probation process.

“It’s our evidence that he is not capable of living independently,” Rumsey said.

Rayton was due for a hearing Friday on whether his probation should be revoked, but Judge Paula Martin granted Rumsey’s request to have more time to look into what happened. She scheduled a hearing for Nov. 17.

Assistant Dist. Atty. Brandon Jones didn’t oppose the delay, but he said he found it ironic that Rayton was now arguing that he couldn’t handle probation. One of the arguments his previous attorney used to get a lightened, non-prison sentence from Judge Martin was that he was capable of succeeding on probation.

“We feel he did understand his probation,” Jones said.

Rayton was one of three men who received lightened sentences from Judge Martin for having sex with the intoxicated teen in June 2003. One of the co-defendants, William N. Haney, was sent to prison this spring for a long list of probation violations.

In August, the Kansas Court of Appeals overturned Martin’s sentences for Haney and Brian K. Ussery, finding they were too lenient and an abuse of discretion. Haney and Ussery are asking the Kansas Supreme Court to review that decision and have not been resentenced.