## Facts

- Wayne Meinert and his wife were babysitting three-year-old Jeanette Lowery.
- After the child urinated on the floor, Meinert spanked her.
- The child’s parents had not authorized spanking.
- The child’s father reported that red marks remained on the child’s buttocks about four hours later.
- The State charged Meinert with endangering a child under K.S.A. 21-3608(1)(a), which criminalized willfully causing or permitting a child to suffer “unjustifiable physical pain or mental distress.”
- Meinert moved to dismiss, arguing the phrase “unjustifiable physical pain” was unconstitutionally vague; the district court dismissed the complaint.

## Issues

1. Whether the statutory phrase “unjustifiable physical pain” in K.S.A. 21-3608(1)(a) is unconstitutionally vague for failing to provide fair notice of prohibited conduct.
2. Whether the phrase lacks enforceable standards and therefore permits arbitrary or discriminatory enforcement, violating due process.

## Decision

- The Kansas Supreme Court affirmed the district court’s dismissal of the criminal complaint.
- The court held the phrase “unjustifiable physical pain” was unconstitutionally vague and failed to identify prohibited conduct with sufficient definiteness.
- The court concluded the statute provided no workable standards for distinguishing lawful discipline from criminal conduct.

## Legal Principles

- A statute is presumed constitutional; courts resolve doubts in favor of validity and construe statutes to uphold them where reasonably possible.
- Due process requires criminal laws to be sufficiently definite so ordinary people can understand what conduct is prohibited.
- Due process also requires explicit standards that limit enforcement discretion; statutes that invite arbitrary or discriminatory enforcement are void for vagueness.
- When a statute provides no reasonably ascertainable standard of guilt and people of common intelligence must guess at its meaning and application, it is unconstitutional.

## Conclusion

Because “unjustifiable physical pain” was undefined and supplied no limiting standards—particularly in an area involving common parental or caretaker discipline—the statute failed to provide fair notice and permitted inconsistent enforcement; the prosecution was therefore barred and the dismissal was affirmed.


State v. Meinert, 594 P.2d 232 (Kan. 1979)