Verge v. State, 335 P.3d 679

Verge was convicted of capital murder in 1997 and sentenced to life without parole for 40 years, as the death-penalty could not be imposed given an incomplete jury verdict on aggravation.
The original decision in Verge I upheld the hard 40-year term under Kansas law then in effect.
Verge pursued multiple 60-1507 motions challenging his sentence; district court treated some as illegal-sentence claims and denied them as untimely or successive.
In 2013 Verge filed a new 60-1507 motion asserting Alleyne v. United States created a retroactive intervening change requiring jury-fact findings for aggravators.
The district court summarily dismissed, and Verge appealed, arguing Alleyne applies retroactively; the issue is whether Alleyne is retroactive to collateral review.
The Kansas Supreme Court held Alleyne does not apply retroactively to cases final on collateral review and affirmed dismissal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Retroactivity of Alleyne on collateral review	Verge: Alleyne is a new rule applicable retroactively to collateral review.	State: Alleyne is not retroactive to collateral reviews.	Alleyne does not apply retroactively to collateral review.
Intervening change in the law for 60-1507 motions	Alleyne constitutes an intervening change permitting relief if retroactive.	Even if Alleyne is a new rule, retroactivity for collateral review is denied, so motion remains successive/untimely.	Alleyne does not apply retroactively; motion remains successive and untimely.
Alternative grounds to relief under 60-1507 or 22-3504	If Alleyne doesn’t apply, relief could be available under different theories or as a motion to correct illegal sentence.	No relief under 60-1507 or 22-3504 without Alleyne retroactivity; final judgment stands.	Even when construed liberally, Alleyne-via- collateral review remains non-retroactive; alternative grounds fail.

Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (U.S. 2000) (any fact increasing penalty beyond maximum must be jury-found)
State v. Gould, 271 Kan. 394, 23 P.3d 801 (Kan. 2001) (Apprendi precedent applied to Kansas sentencing scheme)
Whisler v. State, 272 Kan. 864, 36 P.3d 290 (Kan. 2001) (Apprendi retroactivity to collateral review rejected)
State v. Soto, 299 Kan. 102, 322 P.3d 334 (Kan. 2014) (Alleyne applied to remove hard 50 where applicable; retroactivity discussed)
Rowland v. State, 289 Kan. 1076, 219 P.3d 1212 (Kan. 2009) (intervening change requirement for 60-1507 analyzed)
Teague v. Lane, 489 U.S. 288 (U.S. 1989) (retroactivity framework for new constitutional rules)
In re Payne, 733 F.3d 1027 (10th Cir. 2013) (federal collateral-review retroactivity for Alleyne analyzed)
Alleyne v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2151 (2013) (any fact that increases mandatory minimum sentence must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt)
State v. Neer, 247 Kan. 137, 795 P.2d 362 (Kan. 1990) (new constitutional rules generally not retroactive on collateral review)
State v. Synoracki, 280 Kan. 934, 126 P.3d 1121 (Kan. 2006) (collateral-review retroactivity limitations applied to Apprendi-related rules)
State v. Neal, 292 Kan. 625, 258 P.3d 365 (Kan. 2011) (limits on appeal of illegal sentences; standard of review)