State v. Sartin, 446 P.3d 1068

Background

In 1995 Billy Sartin was sentenced under the Kansas Sentencing Guidelines Act (KSGA) to 604 months (later reduced to 570 months) using a criminal-history score that included five prior Illinois felony convictions.
The five Illinois priors: two 1987 aggravated criminal sexual battery convictions, two 1987 home-invasion convictions, and a 1993 aggravated criminal sexual abuse conviction.
In June 2015 Sartin filed a pro se K.S.A. 22-3504(1) motion to correct an illegal sentence arguing his 1993 Illinois conviction should be scored as a nonperson felony under State v. Murdock (Murdock I).
The district court denied the motion citing State v. Keel and legislative abrogation of Murdock I; the Kansas Court of Appeals affirmed as to the 1993 conviction (finding it comparable to Kansas aggravated sexual battery) but refused to review challenges to the other four priors because they were not specifically raised in the motion.
The Kansas Supreme Court affirmed the comparability ruling for the 1993 conviction (using the contemporaneous "closest approximation" test) but held the Court of Appeals erred in declining to consider the merits of Sartin’s challenges to the other four prior convictions and remanded for consideration of those claims.

Issues

Issue	Sartin's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Whether the 1993 Illinois conviction for aggravated criminal sexual abuse was properly classified as a person felony for KSGA scoring	The Illinois offense is broader; Apprendi/Descamps bar judicial fact-finding to equate out-of-state elements to Kansas person offenses	The Illinois offense is comparable to Kansas aggravated sexual battery under the law in effect in 1995	Affirmed: under the then-applicable "closest approximation" test the Illinois offense was comparable and scored as a person felony
Whether Apprendi/Descamps invalidate the 1995 sentencing classification retroactively	Judicial fact-finding is constitutionally barred; later case law should render the sentence illegal	Sentence legality is measured by law in effect when pronounced; subsequent changes cannot make a previously legal sentence illegal	Rejected: K.S.A. 22-3504(1) claims are controlled by the law at the time of sentencing (Murdock II); later changes do not retroactively create illegality
Proper legal test for comparing out-of-state offenses for KSGA scoring	Apply the narrower-or-identical elements test (as in later cases like Wetrich)	Use the test in effect at sentencing (closest approximation in 1995)	Use the law effective at sentencing; for Sartin (1995) the closest-approximation test governs
Whether the Court of Appeals could consider on appeal challenges to the other four Illinois priors not explicitly listed in the motion to correct	All five priors were challenged in appellate briefing; K.S.A. 22-3504(1) allows correction at any time, so appellate review is warranted	The Court of Appeals treated the motion as limited to the 1993 conviction and declined to consider new claims on appeal	Reversed on this point: Court of Appeals erred by refusing to consider the other four priors; remanded for merits review

Key Cases Cited

Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (prohibition on judicial fact-finding that increases punishment)
Descamps v. United States, 570 U.S. 254 (rule limiting use of sentencing enhancements when prior-offense elements differ)
State v. Murdock, 299 Kan. 312 (2014) (Murdock I) (held out-of-state convictions scored as nonperson crimes)
State v. Keel, 302 Kan. 560 (2015) (overruled Murdock I)
State v. Wetrich, 307 Kan. 552 (2018) (refined comparability test for out-of-state convictions)
State v. Murdock, 309 Kan. 585 (2019) (Murdock II) (K.S.A. 22-3504(1) claims judged by law in effect at sentencing)
State v. Luarks, 302 Kan. 972 (2015) (K.S.A. 22-3504(1) allows appellate consideration of illegal sentence issues raised for first time on appeal)