Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Moncla

Supreme Court of Kansas

March 6, 2015

STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee,
v.
DAVID MONCLA, Appellant

Appeal from Sedgwick District Court; GREGORY L.WALLER, judge.

SYLLABUS

1. A criminal defendant is not entitled to appointment of counsel and a hearing on a motion to correct an illegal sentence unless the motion, files, and record in the case show there is a substantial issue of law or fact. A motion's mere citation of cases and presentation of a legal argument is not necessarily enough to merit appointment of counsel and a hearing.

2. An illegal sentence under K.S.A. 22-3504 is (1) a sentence imposed by a court without jurisdiction; (2) a sentence that does not conform to the applicable statutory provision, either in character or the term of authorized punishment; or (3) a sentence that is ambiguous with respect to the time and manner in which it is to be served.

3. On the facts of this case, the defendant's conviction for first-degree murder bestowed jurisdiction to sentence upon the district court, and the judge's pronounced hard 40 sentence conformed to the statutory requirements, including the existence of sufficient evidence to support the existence of the aggravator that the murder was committed in an especially heinous, atrocious, or cruel manner.

4. A sentence imposed in violation of a constitutional provision, such as the Sixth Amendment right protected under Alleyne v. United States, 570 U.S. __, 133 S.Ct. 2151, 186 L.Ed.2d 314 (2013), does not fit the definition of an illegal sentence under K.S.A. 22-3504.

5. On the facts of this case, the defendant's sentence was final when the district court judge memorialized the amount of restitution in a journal entry.

6. On the facts of this case, the district judge's failure to hold a hearing in open court with the defendant present in order to set the amount of restitution did not deprive the district court of jurisdiction or make the sentence illegal under K.S.A. 22-3504.

Carl F.A. Maughan, of Maughan Law Group LC, of Wichita, argued the cause and was on the brief for appellant.

Matt J. Maloney, assistant district attorney, argued the cause, and Marc Bennett, district attorney, and Derek Schmidt, attorney general, were on the brief for appellee.

OPINION

Page 1162

[301 Kan. 550] BEIER, J.

David Moncla appeals the district court's summary denial of his motion to correct ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.