fairness, a defendant may file a late direct appeal under the following narrow exceptional circumstances: (1) when the defendant has not been informed of his or her right to appeal; (2) when the defendant has not been furnished an attorney to perfect his or her appeal; and (3) when the defendant has been furnished an attorney who failed to perfect the appeal. See Patton, 287 Kan. at 206; State v. Ortiz, 230 Kan. 733, 735-36, 640 P.2d 1255 (1982). In his response to the show cause order, Howard argues that Kansas appellate courts “have expanded the sc ed counsel’s failure to timely notify K.S.A. 60-1507 movant that motion was denied and that movant had right to appeal entitled movant to file notice of appeal out of time for original K.S.A. 60-1507 motion); Ortiz, 230 Kan. at 736 (<HOLDING>). Unlike the cases where the defendant or a
holding that identification of appellant in notice of appeal is a jurisdictional requirement and that the failure to name a party in a notice to appeal constitutes a failure of that party to appeal holding that the filing of an opening brief within the time period for filing a notice of appeal could constitute notice of appeal holding that prejudice should be presumed where counsel filed notice of appeal but failed to perfect the direct appeal recognizing that exception to requirement of timely filing of notice of appeal exists in cases where defendant either was not told of right to appeal or was not furnished attorney to exercise those rights or was furnished attorney for that purpose who failed to perfect and complete appeal holding that trial counsel owes a criminal defendant a duty to file a notice of appeal regardless of whether the attorney was retained for the appeal or not