State v. McDaniel, 112513

Background

McDaniel was charged with felony murder and aggravated robbery after admitting involvement in a planned robbery in which Ronald Wilson was shot and killed; his confession was the State's primary evidence.
At the preliminary hearing McDaniel sought to discharge his court‑appointed attorney (Pamela Parker), initially attempting an oral motion; the presiding judge (Burgess) cut him off and later, after McDaniel had left the courtroom, made on‑the‑record observations about McDaniel’s communications with Parker.
McDaniel filed written motions for substitute counsel; a different judge (Pullman) later heard complaints, denied the first motion (but continued trial to allow preparation), and ultimately granted a later motion and appointed new counsel before trial.
On appeal McDaniel raised three principal claims: (1) he was deprived of his right to be present at a critical stage when Judge Burgess made remarks outside his presence; (2) the court failed to inquire into an alleged conflict of interest / breakdown with Parker; and (3) the felony‑murder jury instruction improperly foreclosed consideration of whether the murder occurred before the underlying felony.
The Kansas Supreme Court found the trial court erred by (a) excluding McDaniel from the post‑hearing record comment and (b) failing to inquire at the preliminary hearing when McDaniel expressed dissatisfaction with counsel, but held those errors harmless and that no Sixth Amendment conflict‑of‑interest relief was warranted.

Issues

Issue	McDaniel's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Right to be present at post‑hearing remarks	Judge Burgess reopened the record and made observations outside McDaniel’s presence; this violated his statutory and constitutional right to be present and was structural error requiring reversal	The remarks were a brief note and not a critical stage because the preliminary hearing was completed; any absence was harmless	Error in excluding McDaniel, but not structural; error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt under Chapman and did not require reversal
Duty to inquire into potential conflict / substitute counsel	McDaniel contends his expressed dissatisfaction required the court to inquire and appoint new counsel; failure to inquire at the preliminary hearing violated his right to conflict‑free counsel and may trigger Cronic relief	The later hearing showed no actual conflict affecting representation; Parker’s refusal to file a meritless pro se motion was not an actual conflict and McDaniel later received new counsel before trial	Court abused discretion by not inquiring at the preliminary hearing, but McDaniel failed to show an actual conflict or prejudice; no relief required under Cuyler/Mickens/Strickland standards
Felony‑murder instruction (res gestae timing)	The jury should have been explicitly instructed that whether the killing occurred within the res gestae of the felony was a jury question; omission prevented consideration that killing preceded the felony	The instruction tracked the parties’ agreed language and pattern PIK language; jury could still find whether killing occurred "while" the felony was committed	Instruction fairly and accurately stated the law; no reversible error (issue not invited and clear‑error standard not satisfied)

Key Cases Cited

Chapman v. California, 386 U.S. 18 (harmless‑beyond‑a‑reasonable‑doubt standard for constitutional errors)
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (two‑part test for ineffective assistance: deficient performance and prejudice)
Cuyler v. Sullivan, 446 U.S. 335 (adverse‑effect test for conflicts of interest)
Mickens v. Taylor, 535 U.S. 162 (treatment of conflict‑of‑interest claims not involving concurrent representation)
Rushen v. Spain, 464 U.S. 114 (ex parte communications/right to be present can be subject to harmless‑error analysis)
State v. Calderon, 270 Kan. 241 (absence during critical stages may be structural in some contexts)
State v. Pfannenstiel, 302 Kan. 747 (duty to inquire when defendant articulates dissatisfaction with counsel)
State v. Phillips, 295 Kan. 929 (elements of felony‑murder: res gestae and direct causal connection)
State v. Jackson, 280 Kan. 541 (finding "while" in felony‑murder instruction requires acquittal if felony was completed before killing)