State v. Turner, 542 P.3d 304

Cardell Turner was charged with attempted first-degree murder (two counts) and conspiracy to commit murder after an incident where he pointed but did not fire a gun at two men in Wichita, Kansas in 2018.
Turner claimed he acted in self-defense, testifying that one of the victims pointed a gun at him first; the victims testified otherwise.
Prior to trial, Turner sought new appointed counsel, alleging ineffective assistance; the district court denied this, noting that Turner's complaints stemmed from unreasonable expectations.
At trial, Turner’s counsel did not request a self-defense instruction for the jury.
Turner was convicted on all charges, moved for a new trial on grounds of ineffective assistance, and also moved for judge recusal based on alleged bias; all such motions were denied.
The Kansas Supreme Court reviewed the Court of Appeals' decision affirming the convictions but vacating for resentencing due to a criminal history score error.

Issue	Turner's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Self-Defense Jury Instruction	The court erred by failing to instruct the jury on self-defense, which was Turner's only viable defense.	Self-defense was not available as Turner was the initial aggressor and did not try to escape.	Instruction was factually and legally appropriate, but omission was not clear error given the evidence against Turner.
Substitute Counsel	There was a complete communication breakdown due to ineffective counsel, warranting new counsel.	Dissatisfaction stemmed from Turner's unreasonable expectations and would persist with new counsel.	Denial of substitute counsel was proper; no abuse of discretion.
Ineffective Assistance for Failure to Request Self-Defense Instruction	Counsel was objectively unreasonable in not seeking the instruction, prejudicing Turner.	No deficiency because the instruction wasn’t factually warranted.	Counsel was deficient, but no prejudice because overwhelming evidence would have led to conviction regardless.
Judge’s Recusal	Judge was biased based on courtroom behavior and adverse rulings.	No evidence of bias; mere adverse rulings and courtroom management do not prove prejudice.	No error in denying recusal; no objective evidence of bias or due process violation.

State v. Strickland, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (establishes standard for ineffective assistance of counsel: deficiency and prejudice)
State v. Brown, 305 Kan. 413 (Kan. 2016) (trial strategy disagreements do not show a complete breakdown in communication)
State v. Kemble, 291 Kan. 109 (Kan. 2010) (judges have broad discretion in controlling courtrooms)
State v. Moyer, 306 Kan. 342 (Kan. 2017) (sets standard for judicial recusal and objective determination of bias)
State v. Harris, 313 Kan. 579 (Kan. 2021) (self-defense instruction warranted if competent evidence could support the theory)