Kansas Supreme Court – Criminal
STATE V. GRAY
SEDGWICK DISTRICT COURT - AFFIRMED
NO. 109,912 – MARCH 18, 2016
FACTS: Gray was convicted of four counts of rape and one count of attempted rape. District court imposed consecutive sentences for each rape conviction, and a concurrent sentence for the attempted rape conviction. Twenty-six years later Gray filed a motion under K.S.A. 22-3504 to correct an illegal sentence, which the district court summarily dismissed. On appeal Gray claimed the plain language of K.S.A. 22-3504 dictates that movants should be entitled to counsel and a hearing, and argued for reversal of Kansas case law to the contrary. He also challenged the sentence as ambiguous because the sentencing court failed to identify crimes and statutes for three rape charges, and failed to identify statute for rape charge underlying the attempt.
ISSUES: (1) Procedure for K.S.A. 22-3504 motion, (2) Legality of sentence
HELD: District court used proper procedures in summarily denying Gray’s motion to correct an illegal sentence. No convincing argument is advanced for withdrawing longstanding rule that district court may summarily dismiss a motion to correct an illegal sentence if district court’s preliminary examination of the motion and record of the case conclusively shows the defendant is not entitled to relief.
Under facts of this case, district court did not err in concluding Gray’s sentence is legal. District court’s denial of Gray’s motion to correct an illegal sentence is affirmed.
STATUTES: K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 22-3601; K.S.A. 21-3301, -3502, -4501(b), -4618, 22-3504, -3504(1), -3504(2)