Sherwood v. State

by
The Supreme Court affirmed the judgment of the district court summarily denying Defendant's pro se Kan. Stat. Ann. 60-1507 motion, holding that Defendant's due process rights were not violated and that summary denial was appropriate.After Defendant filed his section 60-1507 motion the State filed a written response asking the district court to summarily deny the motion because the motion was untimely, Defendant's claims were conclusory, and Defendant failed to establish a manifest injustice. The district court summarily denied the motion three days later. The court of appeals affirmed. The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the district court did not violate due process when it declined to appoint counsel for Defendant; and (2) summary denial was appropriate in this case. View "Sherwood v. State" on Justia Law