Court Opinion

ID: 9808495
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 20:39:59.367712+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:12:15.894503
License: Public Domain

Rosen, J.,
dissenting: I agree with the majority that under the plain language of K.S.A. 21-2512, Cheeks’ custodial status at the time he filed his requested relief allows the petition for postcon-viction DNA testing to go forward.
However, I do not agree that Cheeks is entitled to the relief he continues to seek. Based on the reasoning set forth in my dissent in State v. Cheeks, 298 Kan. 1, 17-20, 310 P.3d 346 (2013), I would deny his request and dismiss the petition.
Stegall, J., joins in the foregoing dissenting opinion.