State v. FordAnnotate this Case
In Ford I, a district court presiding over Defendant’s criminal case ordered and received a competency evaluation. There was no record of a subsequent competency hearing, and yet the court did not suspend proceedings pursuant to Kan. Stat. Ann. 22-3302. Rather, the court accepted Defendant’s guilty plea and sentenced him. In Ford II, Defendant filed a motion to correct an illegal sentence, arguing that the Ford I court lacked jurisdiction to convict him. The Ford II court denied Defendant’s motion after conducting a retrospective competency hearing and finding that Defendant had been competent when he entered his plea. The Supreme Court reversed, holding (1) future movants cannot use a motion to correct an illegal sentence to claim a violation of section 22-3302; (2) under the facts of this case, a meaningful retrospective competency hearing could rectify the district court’s failure to comply with section 22-3302 during Ford I; but (3) because Defendant was not present for the Ford II retrospective competency hearing and there was no indication he waived his right to be present, the procedural competency error had not been rectified. Remanded.