One big question in the current case was: what type of appeal was that? If it was an appeal from a habeas ruling (under K.S.A. 60-1507), the appellate court would have jurisdiction and could remand the habeas order. If it was an appeal from a question reserved, any appellate decision should not effect the sentence. The KSC ultimately held that the state had pretty specifically said that the appeal was from a question reserved in its notice of appeal and docketing statement and, therefore, held that the COA in the first appeal had improperly recharacterized the appeal as a habeas appeal. The KSC also clarified that, despite some previous published cases in which it had remanded for resentencing on appeals from questions reserved, an appeal on a question reserved cannot effect the defendant:
We reemphasize our rule to keep future courts from straying from it. An appellate court's answer to a question reserved by the State has no effect on the criminal defendant in the underlying case.
So two big points: (1) state is bound by its election of avenue for appeal and (2) an appellate court cannot vacate a sentence in an appeal on a question reserved. It's nice to have both of of those points clarified.