State v. Dubry, 444 P.3d 328

Dubry pleaded guilty to kidnapping (severity level 3) for a crime alleged in December 2010 and was sentenced March 30, 2011.
Presentence report scored three prior convictions as person felonies (two pre-1993 Kansas convictions and a 1981 Wyoming conviction for "immodest, immoral, or indecent liberties with a child"), producing an A criminal history score and a 233-month sentence; defense did not object at sentencing.
In 2015 Dubry moved to correct an illegal sentence, arguing pre-1993 and out-of-state priors should be nonperson offenses based on State v. Murdock (Murdock I); that rule was later overruled by Keel.
On appeal to the Court of Appeals, Dubry pivoted to argue the Wyoming statute was broader than the Kansas indecent-liberties statute, so classification as a person crime required impermissible judicial factfinding under Descamps and Apprendi.
After the Kansas Supreme Court decided Wetrich (requiring an out-of-state statute not be broader than the Kansas reference offense to be "comparable"), Dubry asked the court to apply Wetrich to his case.
The Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeals: Dubry was sentenced before Wetrich, and under Murdock II a sentence legal when pronounced does not become illegal due to subsequent changes in law; therefore Wetrich does not apply retroactively to his motion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Dubry)	Defendant's Argument (State)	Held
Whether Dubry's Wyoming prior conviction could be classified as a Kansas person offense without jury factfinding because the Wyoming statute is broader than the Kansas offense	Wyoming statute is broader than Kansas counterpart, so comparability required judicial factfinding in violation of Descamps/Apprendi	Under prevailing law at sentencing, comparability requires statutory comparison only; no extra factfinding—Vandervort controls	Court affirmed: under law at sentencing (Vandervort), statutory comparison sufficed and classification was proper
Whether the Wetrich rule (requiring identical-or-narrower elements) applies to Dubry's post-sentencing motion to correct an illegal sentence	Wetrich should retroactively render the prior-person classification invalid	Murdock II controls: legality is judged by law at time sentence was pronounced; true changes in law do not make a legal sentence illegal later	Court held Wetrich announced a change in law and does not apply to sentences imposed before Wetrich; petition denied

State v. Murdock, 309 Kan. 585 (2019) (Murdock II) (a sentence legal when pronounced cannot be rendered illegal by subsequent changes in law)
State v. Wetrich, 307 Kan. 552 (2018) (interpreting "comparable" to require out-of-state statute not be broader than Kansas reference offense)
State v. Vandervort, 276 Kan. 164 (2003) (comparability assessed by comparing statutes; no additional factfinding required)
State v. Murdock, 299 Kan. 312 (2014) (Murdock I) (earlier interpretation on scoring out-of-state pre-1993 crimes)
State v. Keel, 302 Kan. 560 (2015) (overruled Murdock I)
Descamps v. United States, 570 U.S. 254 (2013) (prior-conviction predicate analysis requires comparison of elements; broader statutes may not qualify)
Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000) (facts increasing maximum penalty, other than prior convictions, must be submitted to a jury)