In a ruling that could affect dozens of other cases, the Kansas Supreme Court on Friday ruled that a man convicted in a fatal drunken-driving wreck should be resentenced because of the wording of a state law.

The decision is expected to significantly shorten Scott Manbeck’s sentence, possibly freeing him from prison, where he has been imprisoned since May 2002 for involuntary manslaughter.

In July 2001, Manbeck was headed west on an Allen County highway, with 30 cans of beer inside his station wagon. He crossed the center line and collided head-on with a car carrying a Harvey County couple, Virgil and Joyce Hiebert. Joyce Hiebert died in the accident.

But Manbeck’s lawyer, James Pratt, noticed a discrepancy in state law concerning DUI punishment between the words “and” and “or.” Manbeck was charged with and pleaded guilty to being under the influence of alcohol or drugs. He was sentenced under a 1996 law for being under the influence of alcohol and drugs.

The sentencing law converted Manbeck’s four previous DUI convictions from misdemeanors to felonies, resulting in a sentence of about 13 years. Had the DUIs counted only as misdemeanors, Manbeck would have received a sentence of less than 4 years.

Pratt’s argument failed at the district court level. But the Kansas Court of Appeals agreed with Pratt. Friday, the Kansas Supreme Court upheld the appeals court ruling.

“An appellate court may consider various aspects of a statute in attempting to determine the legislative intent,” the ruling read. “When the language is plain and unambiguous, an appellate court is bound to implement the expressed intent. Ordinary words are to be given their ordinary meanings without adding something that is not readily found in the statue or eliminating that which is readily found therein.”

In a telephone interview from her home in Humboldt, Allen County Atty. Nanette Kemmerly-Weber said she anticipated Manbeck would be given probation at his resentencing, which was expected to be scheduled in the next several weeks.

Kemmerly-Weber said she anticipated others imprisoned on multiple drunken-driving charges also would asked to be resentenced.

“I have a guy who I sentenced several years ago,” Kemmerly-Weber said. “He now has the opportunity to file a petition for the judge to reverse the decision. I know there must be — I don’t know how many — others who must be in prison under similar circumstances in other counties.”

Since the Kansas Court of Appeals ruling in favor of Manbeck, Kemmerly-Weber has fielded calls from attorneys in other counties with similar cases pending. She said she made that point when she argued the case.

“I said it was an issue of statewide importance, that there were people, there were prosecutors who had cases pending,” she said.

Manbeck’s attorney could not immediately be reached for comment.

The Kansas County & District Attorneys Assn. has asked the Legislature to introduce a bill amending the law — replacing the “and” with “and/or.”

The wording can be easily fixed, said Mike Jennings, chief attorney in the Sedgwick County District Attorney’s Office.