State v. Schaefer
385 P.3d 918
| Kan. | 2016Background
- Schaefer pled no contest to amended on-grid rape and attempted rape counts under a negotiated plea.
- The plea agreement did not mention potential involuntary civil commitment under the Kansas Sexually Violent Predator Act (KSVPA).
- At the plea hearing, the court conducted a detailed colloquy, reviewed sentencing elements, and warned about sex offender registration and possible postrelease supervision.
- Before sentencing, Schaefer moved to withdraw the plea, alleging ineffective counsel, coercion, and lack of information about KSVPA exposure due to medication and head injury.
- The district court denied withdrawal, sentencing Schaefer to substantial imprisonment and lifetime postrelease supervision; the Court of Appeals affirmed, and this court granted review.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether good cause existed to withdraw the plea pre-sentencing | Schaefer claimed lack of competent counsel and coercion, plus failure to advise on KSVPA. | State asserted no good cause; procedural clarity and credibility favored the court. | Court affirmed denial of withdrawal; no reversible good cause shown. |
| Whether failure to advise on KSVPA was good cause | Padilla duty applies; omission could be material to plea withdrawal. | KSVPA is a remote collateral consequence; not required to be advised pre-plea. | Not good cause; KSVPA exposure deemed too remote to invalidate plea. |
| Whether the plea was fairly and understandingly made | Schaefer was not in right mind due to head injury meds, rushed process. | District court observed demeanor; proper colloquy ensured understanding. | Plea found voluntary, knowing, and intelligent. |
| Whether counsel's performance prejudiced Schaefer under ineffective-assistance standard | Omission about KSVPA and coercive pressure could show ineffective assistance. | Aguilar standard for good cause is lower than constitutional ineffectiveness; no prejudice shown. | No ineffective-assistance prejudice; knowledge of KSVPA would not have changed outcome. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Edgar, 281 Kan. 30 (Kan. 2006) (edgar factors guide good-cause inquiry for plea withdrawal)
- State v. Aguilar, 290 Kan. 506 (Kan. 2010) (aguilar allows consideration of factors beyond Edgar)
- Bussell v. State, 25 Kan. App. 2d 424 (Kan. App. 1998) (warning against automatic KSVPA-based deficiencies in post-sentencing review)
- Padilla v. Kentucky, 559 U.S. 356 (U.S. 2010) (duty to inform client of collateral consequences; deportation example)
- Williams, 299 Kan. 509 (Kan. 2014) (limits reweighing credibility on appeal; deferential standard)