State v. Collier – Biles – Affirmed – Sedgwick
114304
| Kan. | Jun 2, 2017Background
- Jeffrey Collier was convicted in 1993 of first-degree murder and aggravated robbery; at sentencing the court scored multiple prior residential burglary convictions/adjudications (late 1980s) as person felonies under the Kansas Sentencing Guidelines Act (KSGA).
- The person-classification of those prior offenses contributed to Collier's criminal history and the sentence for the aggravated robbery (97 months consecutive).
- In 2014 Collier filed a pro se K.S.A. 22-3504(1) motion to correct an illegal sentence, arguing his pre-KSGA residential burglary offenses were misclassified as person felonies.
- He asserted relief under State v. Murdock and State v. Dickey (Dickey I), argued the classification violated Apprendi (Sixth Amendment jury-rights), and claimed he was entitled to a hearing.
- The district court summarily denied the motion; Collier appealed and the Kansas Supreme Court reviewed de novo whether the motion, files, and records conclusively showed he was not entitled to relief.
Issues
| Issue | Collier's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Murdock requires reclassifying Collier's in-state pre-KSGA burglaries as nonperson felonies | Murdock entitles him to nonperson classification for pre-1993 crimes | Keel overruled Murdock; classification is based on statute in effect when current crime was committed | Denied — Keel controls; prior burglaries properly classified as person felonies under law in effect at time of 1993 offenses |
| Whether Dickey I requires reclassification of Collier's prior convictions | Dickey I mandates nonperson classification of pre-KSGA burglary convictions | Collier's priors were under a different burglary statute (aggravated burglary, K.S.A. 21-3716), so Dickey I is inapplicable | Denied — Dickey I does not apply because Collier's priors are under 21-3716, not 21-3715 |
| Whether legislature's person/nonperson classification of pre-KSGA offenses violates Apprendi | Retroactive statutory classification increases sentence without jury factfinding, violating Apprendi | Classification is legislative, a statutory question of law, and not an impermissible factfinding under Apprendi | Denied — classification is a statutory/legal determination under legislature’s sentencing power, not a Sixth Amendment violation |
| Whether summary denial (no hearing) of the K.S.A. 22-3504(1) motion was improper | Collier argued statutory right to a hearing and counsel/presence | Records, files, and motion conclusively showed no entitlement to relief so no hearing required | Denied — summary denial appropriate because record conclusively showed no relief was due |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Murdock, 299 Kan. 312 (Kan. 2014) (held out-of-state pre-KSGA convictions should be classified by reference to prior-state law, resulting in nonperson classification)
- State v. Keel, 302 Kan. 560 (Kan. 2015) (overruled Murdock and held classification of prior convictions is based on comparable Kansas offense as codified when the current crime was committed)
- State v. Dickey, 301 Kan. 1018 (Kan. 2015) (Dickey I) (held KSGA provision requiring judicial factfinding to classify certain pre-KSGA burglary convictions violated Apprendi)
- State v. Dickey, 305 Kan. 217 (Kan. 2016) (Dickey II) (addressed procedural/merits posture of classification challenges under KSGA)
- Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (U.S. 2000) (established that facts increasing punishment beyond statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury)