Summary
The Kansas Supreme Court held that when a conviction is affirmed on direct appeal but the sentence is vacated and the case is remanded for resentencing, the one-year limitation period for filing a motion under K.S.A. 60-1507 begins when the time to appeal from the resentencing expires. The court reversed the district court’s dismissal of Baker’s motion as untimely and remanded for consideration of its merits. The Court of Appeals judgment was affirmed.
Holdings
- When a conviction is affirmed on direct appeal but the sentence is vacated and the case is remanded for resentencing, the one-year limitation period for filing a K.S.A. 60-1507 motion begins after the time to appeal from the resentencing expires.
Questions Presented
- When does the one-year limitation period for filing a K.S.A. 60-1507 motion begin when the conviction is affirmed on direct appeal but the sentence is vacated and the case is remanded for resentencing?
Disposition
reversed_and_remanded
Cases Cited (10)
- State v. Baker, 281 Kan. 997, 135 P.3d 1098 (2006)(followed as procedural history)
- Baker v. State, 42 Kan. App. 2d 949, 219 P.3d 827 (2009)(affirmed in part)
- State v. Arnett, 290 Kan. 41, Syl. ¶ 1, 223 P.3d 780 (2010)(followed)
- State v. Ross, 295 Kan. 1126, 1132-33, 289 P.3d 76 (2012)(followed)
- Murphy v. Nelson, 260 Kan. 589, 596, 921 P.2d 1225 (1996)(followed)
- Kansas Judicial Review v. Stout, 287 Kan. 450, 459-61, 196 P.3d 1162 (2008)(followed)
- Swenson v. State, 284 Kan. 931, 940, 169 P.3d 298 (2007)(followed)
- State v. Stough, 273 Kan. 113, 119, 41 P.3d 281 (2002)(followed by analogy)
- Johnson v. State, 4 Kan. App. 2d 573, 574, 608 P.2d 1044 (1980)(followed by analogy)
- Fischer v. State, 296 Kan. 808, Syl. ¶ 3, 295 P.3d 560 (2013)(followed)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…