photo by: Screenshot/Kansas Supreme Court YouTube

Pictured in this screenshot from oral arguments on Dec. 15, 2020 in the case of State of Kansas v. Danny Queen, left to right and top to bottom, are Kansas Supreme Court Chief Justice Marla Luckert, Justice Eric Rosen, Justice Dan Biles, Justice Caleb Stegall, Justice Evelyn Wilson, Justice KJ Wall, Justice Melissa Standridge, Assistant Douglas County District Attorney Kate Duncan Butler and appellate defender Peter Maharry. This screenshot was taken with permission from the court.

Justices of the Kansas Supreme Court will soon determine whether Danny W. Queen’s convictions in a 2017 Eudora bar shooting should be overturned and his prison sentence vacated because his trial started three days late.

The Kansas Court of Appeals ruled in July that it was “obligated” to vacate Queen’s nearly 19-year prison sentence because he was not brought to trial within the 150 days allowed under state law for defendants who are in custody. As the Journal-World has reported, the Douglas County district attorney’s office requested that the Kansas Supreme Court review that decision.

If the decision stands, Queen, now 39, could not be retried for second-degree murder for fatally shooting Bo M. Hopson, 32, of Eudora, and for attempted second-degree murder and attempted voluntary manslaughter. Assistant District Attorney Kate Duncan Butler argued the case before the court on Tuesday.

In court documents ahead of the arguments, Queen’s appellate defender, Peter Maharry, wrote that Kansas’ speedy trial statute was clear and no clarification from the court was needed. However, the justices asked enough questions about the specific facts in this case that the oral arguments, originally slated for half an hour, went on for about 15 minutes longer than that.

In summary, at Queen’s arraignment in October 2017, the judge asked former Chief Assistant District Attorney Amy McGowan whether April 30, 2018, was the deadline for a speedy trial in Queen’s case; McGowan confirmed that it was. However, both were mistaken: the actual date was March 30. On April 2, when Queen’s trial was set to begin, defense attorneys Dakota Loomis and Joshua Seiden filed a motion to dismiss the case for the speedy trial issues, but the judge denied the motion and the case later proceeded to trial.

A few minutes into Butler’s arguments, Justice Dan Biles asked whether she agreed that case law dictated that it was the state’s responsibility to ensure that defendants were brought to trial within the speedy trial period, and thus that McGowan “had the obligation to both know and correct the district court in the mistake that is apparent here.”

Butler said she agreed, but her position was that Queen’s defense counsel had the same obligation. She said that under rules of professional conduct for attorneys, Loomis and Seiden should have corrected the judge when it came to their attention that the trial date was set outside of the 150-day limit, the same way that they would need to correct the judge if she’d tried to schedule a trial on Christmas.

Justice Caleb Stegall then asked whether Butler was suggesting that defense counsel knew the court was mistaken and stood silent. Butler said the record was unclear about whether the defense attorneys knew during the hearing, but she noted that there had not been any allegations that they intentionally lied or misled the court.

Maharry pointed out later that Loomis had said in court that he had not been aware at the time the trial was set that it was outside the speedy trial deadline. Maharry also said that if the defense attorneys had realized they had a speedy trial defense, then reported that to the judge ahead of time, they would have been acting against their client’s best interest.

The justices asked a number of questions, some dealing with hypothetical situations in which various facts were slightly different; for instance, Stegall asked whether it would change the argument if the judge had asked Loomis or Seiden whether April 30 was the correct date and they had agreed. Maharry said he thought that would be a different argument.

Biles said again near the end of the hearing that he couldn’t get past the fact that case law puts the obligation on the prosecutor to ensure the state hits speedy trial deadlines. Butler, in response to his question, said she agreed that they wouldn’t be having this discussion if McGowan had just said “no” when the judge asked whether she had the correct date.

The justices will consider the arguments they heard Tuesday and come to a ruling sometime in the near future. Lisa Taylor, public information director for the Kansas Supreme Court, said via email that how long the justices’ decision takes depends on the case and the number and complexity of the questions of law being considered.

“It could take anywhere from a few weeks to a few months,” she said. “A few cases take longer, but they are exceptions.”

The oral arguments are available to view on the Kansas Supreme Court’s YouTube page.

As the case currently stands, Queen’s earliest possible release from prison is June 27, 2033, according to Kansas Department of Corrections records. He is currently in custody at Norton Correctional Facility.