State v. Bacon, 443 P.3d 1049

In Aug 2014 Bacon was charged with aggravated human trafficking (later amended to commercial sexual exploitation of a child) after police stopped him with a 17‑year‑old runaway who said he drove her to solicit prostitution.
The district court found Bacon indigent and appointed public defender James Mamalis, who repeatedly continued hearings and trial dates.
Bacon filed pro se "Motion for Diligence" quoting KRPC 1.3 twice, complaining about attorney diligence; the court mailed the filings to Mamalis but took no further action.
About 10 days before trial Bacon retained private counsel Sarah Swain; the court denied a continuance, the State amended charges, and Bacon was convicted by a jury.
Swain moved for a new trial arguing the court should have inquired into Bacon’s pro se complaints about Mamalis; the district court denied relief as untimely and because the pro se filings did not request new counsel.
The Court of Appeals affirmed; the Kansas Supreme Court granted review, assumed without deciding the district court erred in not inquiring, but affirmed because Bacon obtained new counsel for trial and showed no prejudice from the failure to inquire.

Issue	Bacon's Argument	State/Court's Argument	Held
Whether Bacon's pro se KRPC 1.3 filings triggered the trial court's duty to inquire about attorney dissatisfaction	The filings constituted an articulable statement of dissatisfaction triggering inquiry and appointment of new counsel	The filings did not sufficiently allege dissatisfaction or request new counsel, so no duty to inquire was triggered	Court assumed filings did trigger a duty but found no reversible error because Bacon later retained private counsel and showed no prejudice
Whether failure to inquire requires remand or presumed prejudice	Remand required and prejudice should be presumed or relief warranted	Prejudice is not automatically presumed absent multiple concurrent representation, timely objection, and failure to inquire; remand unnecessary if defendant received new counsel and no prejudice shown	No remand; prejudice not shown or presumed on these facts because Bacon had new counsel and does not allege ineffective trial representation

State v. Brown, 331 P.3d 797 (2014) (defendant must show justifiable dissatisfaction; court duty to inquire when articulated statement of dissatisfaction is made)
State v. Bowen, 323 P.3d 853 (2014) (prejudice is presumed only in limited circumstances: concurrent representations, timely objection, and failure to inquire)
State v. Gilbert, 326 P.3d 1060 (2014) (courts construe pro se pleadings liberally but cannot supply arguments not made)
Atkins v. Webcon, 419 P.3d 1 (2018) (appellate affirmance may be upheld as right for the wrong reason)