Skip to main content

State v. Warrior

Citations

  • 303 Kan. 1008
  • 368 P.3d 1111
  • 2016 Kan. LEXIS 143

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding constitutional challenge to sentencing procedures could not be raised in a motion to correct an illegal sentence
  • holding K.S.A. 22-3504\does not cover a claim that a sentence violates a constitutional provision\
  • stating Kansas’s version of Rule 35(a) “does not cover a claim that a sentence violates a constitutional provision”
  • defining an illegal sentence to include a sentence that does not conform to the applicable statutory provision, either in the character or the term of authorized punishment
  • finding a motion to correct an illegal sentence is not the proper procedural vehicle to challenge the constitutionality of a sentence, so court was correct to deny the motion
  • Warrior's motion to correct illegal sentence was not the appropriate mechanism to challenge the procedures used to impose her hard 50 life sentence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Beier

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

20 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.