Law Review and Bar Journal References:

Survey of Recent Cases, 43 K.L.R. 999 (1995).

"Criminal Procedure Review: Survey of Recent Cases," 44 K.L.R. 895 (1996).

Survey of Recent Cases, 46 K.L.R. 916, 922, 928 (1998).

"Habeas Corpus in Kansas: The Great Writ Affords Postconviction Relief at K.S.A. 60-1507," Martha J. Coffman, 67 J.K.B.A. No. 1, 16 (1998).

"Criminal Procedure Survey of Recent Cases," 50 K.L.R. 901 (2002).

CASE ANNOTATIONS

1. Whether defendant's exclusion from limited retroactivity provision of state sentencing guidelines violates equal protection examined. Chiles v. State, 254 Kan. 888, 890, 869 P.2d 707 (1994).

2. Whether court's refusal to convert defendants' sentences to guidelines sentences constitutes imposition of illegal sentence examined. State v. Gonzales, 255 Kan. 243, 244, 246, 250, 874 P.2d 612 (1994).

3. Whether defendants whose sentences are converted to guidelines remain subject to postrelease supervision upon release examined. Phillpot v. Shelton, 19 Kan. App. 2d 654, 655, 660, 875 P.2d 289 (1994).

4. Whether section applies to person given suspended sentence after July 1, 1993, for crime committed prior to July 1, 1993, examined. State v. Williams, 19 Kan. App. 2d 903, 904, 878 P.2d 854 (1994).

5. Whether exclusion of drug offenders from retroactive provisions of sentencing guidelines lacks rational relationship to purpose of section examined. State v. Jones, 19 Kan. App. 2d 913, 914, 878 P.2d 845 (1994).

6. Whether court converting eligible inmate's sentence to guidelines may reimpose original sentence without written findings examined. State v. Staven, 19 Kan. App. 2d 916, 917, 881 P.2d 573 (1994).

7. Whether sentencing attempted burglary of dwelling conviction should be classified as person felony for criminal history examined. State v. Fifer, 20 Kan. App. 2d 12, 13, 881 P.2d 589 (1994).

8. Whether defendant must challenge criminal history classification in sentencing court examined; failure of Kansas department of corrections to transmit sentencing guideline report discussed. Safarik v. Bruce, 20 Kan. App. 2d 61, 64, 883 P.2d 1211 (1994).

9. Whether court erred in converting sentencing aggravated battery sentence to severity level 4 offense examined. State v. Houdyshell, 20 Kan. App. 2d 90, 95, 884 P.2d 437 (1994).

10. Whether reclassification of sentencing aggravated incest sentence as aggravated criminal sodomy violates ex post facto law prohibition examined. State v. Colston, 20 Kan. App. 2d 107, 111, 883 P.2d 1231 (1994).

11. Whether court erred by converting attempt to engage in indecent liberties with a child to severity level 5 examined. State v. Ward, 20 Kan. App. 2d 238, 241, 886 P.2d 890 (1994).

12. Whether allowing prosecution to amend habitual criminal act motion to substitute valid for invalid conviction is reversible error examined. State v. Hunt, 257 Kan. 388, 397, 894 P.2d 178 (1995).

13. Whether limited retroactivity of sentencing guidelines is constitutional examined. State v. Ricks, 257 Kan. 435, 442, 894 P.2d 191 (1995).

14. Whether mislabeled pro se motions for sentence conversion should be reviewed as petitions for habeas corpus examined. State v. Randall, 257 Kan. 482, 483, 893 P.2d 196 (1995).

15. Whether ineligibility for sentence conversion on any crime precludes retroactive application of sentencing guidelines examined. State v. Lunsford, 257 Kan. 508, 509, 511, 894 P.2d 200 (1995).

16. Whether defendant sentenced after KSGA (K.S.A. 21-4701 et seq.) enactment for crimes committed before enactment is denied equal protection by preclusion of sentencing guideline retroactivity examined. State v. Fierro, 257 Kan. 639, 641, 649, 895 P.2d 186 (1995).

17. Whether defendant committed crimes which would be in presumptive nonimprisonment grid block for retroactive sentencing guidelines conversion purposes examined. State v. Duff, 20 Kan. App. 2d 393, 396, 888 P.2d 861 (1995).

18. Whether changing a crime's presumptive sentence from nonimprisonment to presumed imprisonment precludes retroactive sentencing guidelines conversion examined. State v. Sidders, 20 Kan. App. 2d 405, 406, 888 P.2d 409 (1995).

19. Whether defendant who uses firearm in commission of crime is eligible for retroactive application of sentencing guidelines examined. State v. George, 20 Kan. App. 2d 648, 651, 891 P.2d 1118 (1995).

20. Whether default judgment for defendant is appropriate remedy should district court fail to hold timely retroactive sentence conversion hearing examined. State v. Geis, 20 Kan. App. 2d 778, 780, 894 P.2d 213 (1995).

21. Whether judge erred by failing to set forth substantial and compelling reasons for dispositional departure examined. State v. Rhoads, 20 Kan. App. 2d 790, 798, 892 P.2d 918 (1995).

22. Whether subsection (d)(3) hearing deadline provisions are mandatory or directory in retroactive conversion of inmate's sentence examined. State v. Porting, 20 Kan. App. 2d 869, 870, 892 P.2d 915 (1995).

23. Whether subsection (d)(3) is directory so that failure to comply with provisions does not divest court of jurisdiction examined. State v. Webb, 20 Kan. App. 2d 873, 874, 893 P.2d 255 (1995).

24. Whether trial court has jurisdiction to hear challenge to KDOC offense severity classification in notice of findings examined. State v. Mejia, 20 Kan. App. 2d 890, 891, 894 P.2d 202 (1995).

25. Whether KSGA (K.S.A. 21-4701 et seq.) implicitly authorizes appeal of denial of motion to convert a sentence retroactively examined. State v. Austin, 20 Kan. App. 2d 950, 952, 901 P.2d 9 (1995).

26. Trial court erred in failing to calculate what defendant's sentence would have been under sentencing guidelines. State v. Richmond, 258 Kan. 449, 463, 904 P.2d 974 (1995).

27. Conversion of defendant's sentence to imprisonment instead of probation for offenses committed on parole constitutes dispositional departure. State v. Trimble, 21 Kan. App. 2d 32, 34, 894 P.2d 920 (1995).

28. Under facts, trial court had discretion to determine sentence should run consecutively to sentence imposed in another county. State v. Chronister, 21 Kan. App. 2d 589, 591, 903 P.2d 1345 (1995).

29. Three-day mailing rule (K.S.A. 60-206(e)) applies to statutory duty of the state to timely object to Kansas department of corrections guideline report. State v. Hunt, 21 Kan. App. 2d 674, 906 P.2d 183 (1995).

30. Defendant's plea for multiple offenses in separate case on same day may be used for KSGA (K.S.A. 21-4701 et seq.) criminal history. State v. Roderick, 259 Kan. 107, 109, 911 P.2d 159 (1996).

31. Kansas department of corrections use of all records available in making retroactivity determination does not violate offenders' rights to due process. Farris v. McKune, 259 Kan. 181, 182, 911 P.2d 177 (1996).

32. Limited retroactivity provision of Kansas sentencing guidelines act did not violate defendant's equal protection rights. Jones v. Bruce, 921 F. Supp. 708, 709 (1996).

33. Trial court did not err by converting aggravated battery against a law officer to a severity level 3 offense. State v. Whitaker, 260 Kan. 85, 90, 917 P.2d 859 (1996).

34. Method of determining eligibility for conversion of sentence discussed. State v. Sammons, 22 Kan. App. 2d 311, 915 P.2d 788 (1996).

35. Section does not allow administrative KSGA (K.S.A. 21-4701 et seq.) conversion to harsher sentence than imposed by trial court. Blomeyer v. State, 22 Kan. App. 2d 382, 386, 915 P.2d 790 (1996).

36. Prosecution motion to seek departure sentence is time-barred when not filed before imposition of conversion sentence. State v. Beall, 22 Kan. App. 2d 486, 920 P.2d 448 (1996).

37. Defendant sentenced after July 1, 1993, eligible for sentence conversion under subsection (b). State v. Torrance, 22 Kan. App. 2d 721, 731, 922 P.2d 1109 (1996).

38. No abuse of discretion in imposing same sentence as originally imposed; appellant not eligible for retroactive application of sentencing guidelines. State v. Goodwin, 261 Kan. 961, 962, 933 P.2d 689 (1997).

39. Retroactivity examined; statute defining length or type of criminal punishment is substantive and applies prospectively unless otherwise expressly provided. State v. Ford, 262 Kan. 206, 208, 936 P.2d 255 (1997).

40. 1996 amendments to K.S.A. 21-4705 concerning sentence modification are not to be applied retroactively. State v. Roseborough, 263 Kan. 378, 383, 951 P.2d 532 (1997).

41. Parole eligibility provisions of K.S.A. 22-3717(n) and K.A.R. 44-6-107 do not override limited retroactivity of subsection (b). State v. Bookless, 23 Kan. App. 2d 730, 935 P.2d 231 (1997).

42. Untimely motion to convert under paragraph (d)(1) improperly dismissed; should have been construed as motion pursuant to K.S.A. 60-1507. State v. Harlin, 23 Kan. App. 2d 800, 936 P.2d 292 (1997).

43. Rule that criminal statute in effect at time crime was committed is penalty imposed does not violate equal protection. State v. Standifer, 24 Kan. App. 2d 441, 442, 946 P.2d 637 (1997).

44. KSGA (K.S.A. 21-4701 et seq.) retroactivity provision does not violate separation of powers, due process, equal protection or constitute ex post facto law. State v. Jones, 24 Kan. App. 2d 669, 670, 951 P.2d 1302 (1998).

45. Trial court did not err in classifying aggravated battery conviction for sentencing conversion purposes. Gross v. State, 24 Kan. App. 2d 806, 807, 953 P.2d 689 (1998).

46. Trial court properly classified arson offenses for sentencing guideline conversion purposes. State v. Maggard, 24 Kan. App. 2d 868, 879, 953 P.2d 1379 (1998).

47. Under facts, petitioner's voluntary manslaughter conviction was ineligible for retroactive sentence conversion. Bradley v. State, 25 Kan. App. 2d 433, 435, 965 P.2d 228 (1998).

48. Section applies only to convictions in the grid blocks specified in section. State v. Cheeks, 280 Kan. 373, 121 P.3d 989 (2005).

49. Burden is on prosecution when defendant objects to his criminal history classification. State v. Schow, 37 Kan. App. 2d 941, 947, 161 P.3d 222 (2007).

50. Failure to calculate the KSGA sentence for previous conviction does not constitute an illegal sentence. State v. England, 45 Kan. App. 2d 33, 245 P.3d 1076 (2010).

51. Defendant's 1987 indeterminate sentence for felony murder and multiple counts of aggravated robbery was ineligible for conversion to a guidelines sentence; the defendant's sentence remains ineligible for retroactive application of the Kansas sentencing guidelines act today, and therefore the 1987 sentence is not illegal. State v. Jeffries, 304 Kan. 748, 753, 375 P.3d 316 (2016).

This website has moved to KSRevisor.gov