BY THE COURT
definition of an illegal sentence does not include a claim
that the sentence violates a constitutional provision, and a
defendant may not file a motion to correct an illegal
sentence based on constitutional challenges to his or her
of the judgment of the Court of Appeals in an unpublished
opinion filed April 10, 2015.
Appeal from Sedgwick District Court; Eric A. Commer, judge.
Judgment of the Court of Appeals is affirmed. Judgment of the
district court is affirmed.
Michael P. Whalen, of Law Office of Michael P. Whalen, of
Wichita, argued the cause and was on the brief for appellant.
J. Gillet, assistant district attorney, argued the cause, and
Marc Bennett, district attorney, and Derek Schmidt, attorney
general, were with him on the brief for appellee.
2003, the State charged Wood with attempted criminal sodomy,
but he later pled guilty to one count of attempted indecent
liberties with a child. The district court accepted
Wood's plea, placed him on 24 months' probation, and
imposed an underlying 12-month prison sentence. Although the
record does not contain a transcript of sentencing, the
journal entry of judgment indicates that the district court
"certified" Wood as a sex offender and informed him
of his duty to register. In January 2006, the court
discharged Wood from probation.
time Wood committed the crime, the Kansas Offender
Registration Act (KORA), K.S.A. 22-4901 et seq.,
required sex offenders to register for 10 years from the date
of discharge or release if it was the offender's first
conviction for a sexually violent crime. K.S.A. 2002 Supp.
22-4906(b); see K.S.A. 2002 Supp. 22-4902(c)(2) (defining
indecent liberties with a child as a "sexually violent
crime"). In 2011, the legislature amended KORA,
increasing the length of time Wood was required to register
to 25 years. See L. 2011, ch. 95, sec. 6; K.S.A. 2011 Supp.
April 2012, Wood filed a motion challenging the retroactive
application of the 2011 KORA amendments, asking the court to
"declare 2011 SB 37 unconstitutional as retroactively
applied." The district court entered a written order
finding that it lacked jurisdiction to consider Wood's
constitutional claims where "1) the trial has been
completed; and 2) probation has been completed or terminated
or a felony sentence of imprisonment has been placed in
effect; and 3) appeal rights have expired or been exhausted;
and 4) . . . the conviction has not been expunged."
appealed, arguing that the district court possessed the
requisite jurisdiction to consider his challenge as a motion
to correct illegal sentence. The panel found, however, that
it had considered and rejected a similar argument in
State v. Ward, No. 109, 325, 2014 WL 5610212 (Kan.
App. 2014) (unpublished opinion), rev. granted 304
Kan. 1022 (2016), which, in turn, relied upon State v.
Simmons, 50 Kan.App.2d 448, 451, 329 P.3d 523 (2014),
rev. granted 304 Kan. 1021 (2016). State v.
Wood, No. 111, 243, 2015 WL 1782675, at *6-7 (Kan. App.
2015) (unpublished opinion). The panel ultimately dismissed
Wood's appeal for a lack of jurisdiction, and we granted
his petition for review.
asserts on appeal that the 2011 amendments to KORA created an
illegal sentence. Whether a sentence is illegal pursuant to
K.S.A. 22-3504 is a question of law subject to plenary
review. State v. Jeffries, 304 Kan. 748, 751, 375
P.3d 316 (2016). We have defined an illegal sentence as one:
" imposed by a court without jurisdiction;  a
sentence that does not conform to the statutory provision,
either in the character or the term of the punishment
authorized; or  a sentence that is ambiguous with respect
to the time and manner in which it is to be served."
State v. Lee, 304 Kan. 416, 417, 372 P.3d 415
has the power to correct an illegal sentence at any time,
including for the first time on appeal. See K.S.A.
22-3504(1); State v. Luarks, 302 Kan. 972, 975, 360
P.3d 418 (2015) (citing State v. Dickey, ...