and the victim do not engage in sexual acts and the victim is 14 or more years of age but less than 16 years of age. This argument appears to fall into subcategory 3, which looks at both the nature of tire offense and the characteristics of a class of offenders. The United States Supreme Court has tended to categorize classes of offenders by broad characteristics, such as defendants under the age of 18 or those'with low range intellectual functioning. See Mossman, 294 Kan. at 928-29. The record here indicates Reed was 18 years old at the time she committed these offenses. She there fore lacks standing to malee the argument that lifetime postrelease supervision is unconstitutional as applied to offenders under the age of 18. See State v. Coman, 294 Kan. 84, 90-91, 273 P.3d 701 (2012) (<HOLDING>); State v. Thompson, 221 Kan. 165, 172, 558
holding that the portion of the retirementplan annuity paid for by the employer but not the portion paid for by the employee  is includable in the marital estate  holding that clear language in one portion of a later may cause ambiguity in another portion to dissipate holding no error occurred in excluding portion of statement offered by defendant because the rejected portion of the conversation in no manner explains or modifies that portion of the conversation which came into evidence holding that an offender convicted under the bestiality portion of the criminal sodomy statute does not have standing to challenge the constitutionality of die portion of the statute that criminalizes homosexual conduct holding that ex parte young applied to plaintiffs claims against the criminal portion of the statute