Kansas Supreme Court Upholds Jail-Time Credit Ruling in Murder Case

Prosecutors call the court's decision 'absurd,' but justices say they must adhere to state law.

Apr. 3, 2026 at 5:54pm

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

An extreme close-up photograph of a single handgun cartridge casing, its metallic surface and textures dramatically illuminated by a harsh, direct camera flash against a pitch-black background, conveying a sense of the serious, investigative nature of the crime.A stark, gritty image of a single piece of physical evidence from the Zongker murder case, highlighting the investigative nature of the crime.Wichita Today

The Kansas Supreme Court has affirmed its 2025 precedent-setting decision in the case of State v. Ervin, which requires defendants to receive credit for all time spent in jail prior to the conclusion of their case, regardless of whether they received credit for that time in a separate case. This ruling has been challenged by Sedgwick County District Attorney Marc Bennett and Attorney General Kris Kobach, who argued it produces 'absurd results.' However, the court maintains that it cannot depart from the clear statutory text to reach a more 'reasonable' outcome, as that is the responsibility of the legislature.

Why it matters

This case highlights the ongoing tension between prosecutors and the courts over the interpretation of state laws regarding jail-time credit. The Supreme Court's adherence to the Ervin precedent, which grants defendants credit for all time spent in jail, is seen by some prosecutors as encouraging criminal behavior and leading to unfair sentencing outcomes. However, the court argues that it must apply the law as written, even if the results seem unreasonable.

The details

The case involves Adrian Zongker, who was convicted of first-degree murder for the 2021 killing of Wichita restaurant owner Oscar Acosta. Zongker was ordered to serve 50 years in prison, but his attorney appealed, arguing that he should have received credit for eight months he spent in county jail on a parole violation warrant while the murder case was pending. The Supreme Court agreed with Zongker, stating that under the Ervin precedent, he is entitled to credit for all time spent in jail prior to the conclusion of his case.

  • In 2024, the Kansas Supreme Court affirmed Zongker's convictions for first-degree murder and criminal possession of a firearm.
  • In 2025, the Supreme Court issued its precedent-setting decision in State v. Ervin, which required defendants to receive credit for all time spent in jail prior to the conclusion of their case.
  • On April 3, 2026, the Kansas Supreme Court affirmed its Ervin decision in the Zongker case, despite prosecutors' arguments that the ruling produces 'absurd results.'

The players

Adrian Zongker

The defendant who was convicted of first-degree murder for the 2021 killing of Wichita restaurant owner Oscar Acosta.

Marc Bennett

The Sedgwick County District Attorney who challenged the Supreme Court's interpretation of jail-time credit laws.

Kris Kobach

The Kansas Attorney General who joined the challenge to the Supreme Court's Ervin precedent.

Randall Hodgkinson

The Kansas Appellate Defender Office attorney who appealed the denial of Zongker's jail-time credit.

K.J. Wall

The Kansas Supreme Court Justice who wrote the opinion affirming the Ervin precedent in the Zongker case.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“We are unpersuaded. Courts do not depart from clear statutory texts to reach outcomes that seem more reasonable, even when drafters failed to anticipate a provision's effect.”

— K.J. Wall, Kansas Supreme Court Justice

“The policy judgments embedded in a statute belong to the Legislature, and we doubt that body would appreciate us substituting our own.”

— K.J. Wall, Kansas Supreme Court Justice

“If your property is being stolen, that's stand your ground right there.”

— Adrian Zongker

“Nobody's life is worth a billion dollars.”

— Family member of Adrian Zongker

What’s next

The Sedgwick County District Court will be required to apply credit for all days Zongker spent in jail prior to the conclusion of his murder case, including any days for which he also received credit in a prior case.

The takeaway

This case highlights the ongoing debate over how to interpret state laws regarding jail-time credit, with prosecutors arguing for more flexibility to reach 'reasonable' outcomes, while the courts maintain they must adhere to the clear statutory text, even if the results seem 'absurd.' The tension between these perspectives will likely continue to play out in future cases.