State v. Ross

Summary

The Kansas Supreme Court affirmed the district court’s denial of Ross’s post‑conviction claim, holding that K.S.A. 22‑3201 is not a procedural vehicle for challenging subject‑matter jurisdiction and that a defective charging document cannot be raised in a motion to correct an illegal sentence under K.S.A. 22‑3504. The court reasoned Ross failed to identify a timely, unexhausted, proper procedural mechanism for his jurisdiction challenge.