State v. Appleby
Supreme Court of Kansas
1Opinion of the Court
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF KANSAS No. 122,281 STATE OF KANSAS, Appellee, v. BENJAMIN A. APPLEBY, Appellant. SYLLABUS BY THE COURT 1. In postconviction sentence modification proceedings, there must be a procedural vehicle for presenting an argument to the court. 2. Applying State v. Coleman, 312 Kan. 114,
472 P.3d 85
(2020), to the circumstances of this case, there is no procedural vehicle that allows a court to revisit a sentence that was final when Alleyne v. United States, 570 U.S. 99, 133 S. Ct. 2151,
186 L. Ed. 2d 314
(2013), was decided. Appeal from Johnson District Court; THOMAS…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Alleyne v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2013
- Ring v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- McMillan v. PennsylvaniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Harris v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- State v. DinkelSupreme Court of Kansas · 2021
- State v. HillSupreme Court of Kansas · 2021
- State v. BedfordSupreme Court of Kansas · 2022
- State v. AlbrightSupreme Court of Kansas · 2022