State v. Wilson
Decision Date | 06 July 2018 |
Docket Number | No. 115,435,115,435 |
Citation | 421 P.3d 742 |
Parties | STATE of Kansas, Appellee, v. Matthew D. WILSON, Appellant. |
Court | Kansas Supreme Court |
Carl F.A. Maughan, of Maughan Law Group LC, of Wichita, argued the cause and was on the brief for appellant.
Barry R. Wilkerson, county attorney, argued the cause, and Derek Schmidt, attorney general, was with him on the brief for appellee.
One night, Matthew Wilson broke into an apartment and began shooting the occupants. Inside the apartment, Joel Solano awoke, grabbed a gun, and hid in his room. Michael Lowery fled from Wilson into Solano's room. Mistaking Lowery for the shooter, Solano shot Lowery dead. Wilson later pled no contest to premeditated murder for Lowery's death, and we affirmed his sentence on direct appeal.
Wilson now argues the district court erred when it summarily denied his postsentence plea withdrawal motion. On appeal, Wilson claims there was an insufficient factual basis to support the elements of premeditated murder because he did not actually kill Lowery—Solano did. Wilson makes the related claim that if his first argument is correct, his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to recognize this fact and advise him accordingly. Finally, Wilson suggests that because the lower court essentially ignored these arguments when Wilson asserted them pro se below, a remand would be appropriate if the record is insufficient to permit us to conduct a meaningful review.
We hold Wilson proximately caused Lowery's death by attacking those in the apartment, leading to Solano's foreseeable defensive response. Wilson—as an active shooter—created a deadly situation for the apartment's occupants, and Solano's shot was not an extraordinary intervening event that became the sole cause of Lowery's death. Because a factual basis supported the plea and a remand is unnecessary, we affirm.
The underlying facts are not disputed. As this court recited in Wilson's first appeal:
At first, the State charged Wilson with one count of first-degree murder under alternative theories of premeditated and felony murder for Lowery's death; four counts of attempted premeditated murder for the attack against Ferguson, Kim, Mailea, and Solano; and one count of aggravated burglary. The State later filed an amended information, and the parties entered into a plea agreement. Wilson pled no contest to the charges as amended: one count of premeditated murder, two counts of attempted premeditated murder, and two counts of aggravated battery. The State agreed to dismiss the remaining charges.
The Riley County District Court held a plea hearing the next day. Wilson confirmed that he authorized and understood the plea agreement. The court walked through the plea colloquy, and Wilson stated that he understood the rights he was waiving and the penalties he could receive; his lawyer had explained the elements the State had to prove and what defenses were available; and he was satisfied with his lawyer. When the court asked about the factual basis for the plea, the State replied:
Defense counsel did not object to the facts proffered by the State. The court determined a factual basis existed for Wilson's no contest pleas and found him guilty on all counts.
At sentencing, the State clarified the factual basis of Wilson's pleas, stating:
Defense counsel did not contest the revised facts. He told the court, "[M]y client and I conducted, discussed, and considered the facts and circumstances in this case, and Mr. Wilson elected to proceed with a no contest plea, and he entered into a plea agreement with the State, believing it was in his best interest to do so."
The court acknowledged the clarification and found a factual basis still existed for Wilson's first-degree murder plea. The court sentenced Wilson to life imprisonment for premeditated murder and a consecutive 310 months' imprisonment for the remaining crimes. It also imposed lifetime parole. We subsequently rejected Wilson's challenge to his consecutive sentences on direct appeal. Wilson , 301 Kan. at 406-07, 343 P.3d 102.
In 2015, Wilson timely moved pro se to withdraw his no contest pleas. Though Wilson alleged many errors, only two are relevant to this appeal: (1) a factual basis did not exist for his premeditated murder plea because he did not shoot Lowery; and (2) his trial counsel was ineffective because he failed to inform Wilson that the elements of premeditated murder were not met. The district court appointed new counsel for Wilson, who filed another plea withdrawal motion. This motion largely argued trial counsel was ineffective on other grounds. It did not expound upon Wilson's pro se challenge.
The court held a nonevidentiary hearing on the motions without Wilson present. At the hearing, defense counsel did not raise—and the court did not discuss—the factual basis underlying the plea. The court summarily denied the motion, finding Wilson failed to establish a manifest injustice because trial counsel was not ineffective and the evidence against Wilson was "overwhelming." However, ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Fleming v. United States, No. 14-CF-1074
...so unusual, abnormal or extraordinary as to constitute [a] superseding cause.") (internal quotation marks omitted); State v. Wilson , 308 Kan. 516, 421 P.3d 742, 750 (2018) ("[W]hen a defendant acts with the requisite mens rea, and that act sets events in motion that lead to a victim's deat......
-
State v. Frantz
...the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that her actions were the proximate cause of Gary's death. See State v. Wilson , 308 Kan. 516, 522, 421 P.3d 742 (2018) (" ‘[U]nlawful conduct which is broken by an independent intervening cause cannot be the proximate cause of the death o......
-
Kucharski-Berger v. Hill's Pet Nutrition, Inc.
..." ‘[w]hen causation is based on a chain of events, an intervening cause may absolve the defendant of liability.’ " State v. Wilson , 308 Kan. 516, 522, 421 P.3d 742 (2018) (quoting State v. Arnett , 307 Kan. 648, 655, 413 P.3d 787 [2018] ). Hill's claims that the fact that Kucharski-Berger ......
-
State v. Spilman
...2017). We commonly refer to these elements together as 'proximate cause.' Arnett, 307 Kan. at 655." State v. Wilson, 308 Kan. 516, 522, 421 P.3d 742 Spilman cannot escape liability for his criminal conduct simply because he was not the last person to pummel Pantle before he died. When two o......