State v. Kelly, 248 P.3d 1282

Kelly was convicted in two Kansas cases (90CR670 and 90CR671) for serious sexual offenses based on a plea in 1991 and treated under an in-lieu-of-imprisonment program.
Before sentencing, Kelly's current counsel suggested a possible conflict of interest involving his prior counsel, which the district court did not fully entertain.
Kelly was mentally incompetent to stand trial at times and underwent treatment at Larned State Security Hospital; he was discharged December 6, 1990.
At sentencing (June 1991), Kelly sought to withdraw his pleas; the court sentenced him to 15 years to life in imprisonment.
Kelly pursued multiple postconviction motions beginning in 1993, culminating in 2007–2008 and 2008 reconsideration requests alleging ineffective assistance and various trial-counsel misconduct claims.
The district court ultimately denied the 2007–2008 motion(s) and the postconviction requests were the subject of the appeal, including the asserted conflict-of-interest issue and the plea-withdrawal argument.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the conflict-of-interest claim was properly reviewed.	Kelly argues Wurtz's conflict required further district inquiry in a plea-withdrawal motion.	State contends the conflict claim is a 60-1507 issue, not a 22-3210 plea withdrawal issue; and it is procedurally barred as a successive, time-barred motion.	Procedurally barred; conflict claim belongs in 60-1507, not 22-3210, and time limits/control bars apply.
Whether Kelly's post-sentencing plea withdrawal was proper to relitigate.	Relitigate plea withdrawal using arguments from sentencing and post-sentencing phases; potentially reverse and remand for evidentiary hearing.	Res judicata bars relitigation; there was a final ruling on plea withdrawal at sentencing; no basis to relitigate.	Res judicata bars reconsideration; district court affirmations upheld.

State v. White, 289 Kan. 279, 211 P.3d 805 (2009) (plea withdrawal factors include counsel competence at plea)
Rice v. State, 37 Kan. App. 2d 456, 154 P.3d 537 (2007) (direct appeal required for certain postconviction relief; 60-1507 prerequisites)
Toney v. State, 39 Kan. App. 2d 944, 187 P.3d 122 (2008) (successive 60-1507 motions; exceptional circumstances)
Woodberry v. State, 33 Kan. App. 2d 171, 101 P.3d 727 (2004) (exceptional circumstances, timing for postconviction relief)
In re Sporn, 289 Kan. 681, 215 P.3d 615 (2009) (four-part test for res judicata applicability)
State v. Murray, 285 Kan. 503, 174 P.3d 407 (2008) (alternative grounds may uphold district court decision)
State v. Jackson, 255 Kan. 455, 874 P.2d 1138 (1994) (procedural guidance in applying 60-1507 framework to plea withdrawal)