Printable Format60-460. Hearsay evidence excluded; exceptions. Evidence of a statement which is made other than by a witness while testifying at the hearing, offered to prove the truth of the matter stated, is hearsay evidence and inadmissible except:
(a) Previous statements of persons present. A statement previously made by a person who is present at the hearing and available for cross-examination with respect to the statement and its subject matter, provided the statement would be admissible if made by the declarant while testifying as a witness.
(b) Affidavits. Affidavits, to the extent admissible by the statutes of this state.
(c) Depositions and prior testimony. Subject to the same limitations and objections as though the declarant were testifying in person: (1) Testimony in the form of a deposition taken in compliance with the law of this state for use as testimony in the trial of the action in which offered; or (2) if the judge finds that the declarant is unavailable as a witness at the hearing, testimony given as a witness in another action or in a preliminary hearing or former trial in the same action, or in a deposition taken in compliance with law for use as testimony in the trial of another action, when: (A) The testimony is offered against a party who offered it in the party's own behalf on the former occasion or against the successor in interest of such party; or (B) the issue is such that the adverse party on the former occasion had the right and opportunity for cross-examination with an interest and motive similar to that which the adverse party has in the action in which the testimony is offered, but the provisions of this subsection shall not apply in criminal actions if it denies to the accused the right to meet the witness face to face.
(d) Contemporaneous statements and statements admissible on ground of necessity generally. A statement which the judge finds was made: (1) While the declarant was perceiving the event or condition which the statement narrates, describes or explains; (2) while the declarant was under the stress of a nervous excitement caused by such perception; or (3) if the declarant is unavailable as a witness, by the declarant at a time when the matter had been recently perceived by the declarant and while the declarant's recollection was clear and was made in good faith prior to the commencement of the action and with no incentive to falsify or to distort.
(e) Dying declarations. A statement by a person unavailable as a witness because of the person's death if the judge finds that it was made: (1) Voluntarily and in good faith; and (2) while the declarant was conscious of the declarant's impending death and believed that there was no hope of recovery.
(f) Confessions. In a criminal proceeding as against the accused, a previous statement by the accused relative to the offense charged, but only if the judge finds that the accused: (1) When making the statement was conscious and was capable of understanding what the accused said and did; and (2) was not induced to make the statement: (A) Under compulsion or by infliction or threats of infliction of suffering upon the accused or another, or by prolonged interrogation under such circumstances as to render the statement involuntary; or (B) by threats or promises concerning action to be taken by a public official with reference to the crime, likely to cause the accused to make such a statement falsely, and made by a person whom the accused reasonably believed to have the power or authority to execute the same.
(g) Admissions by parties. As against a party, a statement by the person who is the party to the action in the person's individual or a representative capacity and, if the latter, who was acting in such representative capacity in making the statement.
(h) Authorized and adoptive admissions. As against a party, a statement: (1) By a person authorized by the party to make a statement or statements for the party concerning the subject of the statement; or (2) of which the party with knowledge of the content thereof has, by words or other conduct, manifested the party's adoption or belief in its truth.
(i) Vicarious admissions. As against a party, a statement which would be admissible if made by the declarant at the hearing if: (1) The statement concerned a matter within the scope of an agency or employment of the declarant for the party and was made before the termination of such relationship; (2) the party and the declarant were participating in a plan to commit a crime or a civil wrong and the statement was relevant to the plan or its subject matter and was made while the plan was in existence and before its complete execution or other termination; or (3) one of the issues between the party and the proponent of the evidence of the statement is a legal liability of the declarant, and the statement tends to establish that liability.
(j) Declarations against interest. Subject to the limitations of the exception in subsection (f), a statement which the judge finds was at the time of the assertion so far contrary to the declarant's pecuniary or proprietary interest or so far subjected the declarant to civil or criminal liability or so far rendered invalid a claim by the declarant against another or created such risk of making the declarant an object of hatred, ridicule or social disapproval in the community that a reasonable person in the declarant's position would not have made the statement unless the person believed it to be true.
(k) Voter's statements. A statement by a voter concerning the voter's qualifications to vote or the fact or content of the voter's vote.
(l) Statements of physical or mental condition of declarant. Unless the judge finds it was made in bad faith, a statement of the declarant's: (1) Then existing state of mind, emotion or physical sensation, including statements of intent, plan, motive, design, mental feeling, pain and bodily health, but not including memory or belief to prove the fact remembered or believed, when such a mental or physical condition is in issue or is relevant to prove or explain acts or conduct of the declarant; or (2) previous symptoms, pain or physical sensation, made to a physician consulted for treatment or for diagnosis with a view to treatment, and relevant to an issue of declarant's bodily condition.
(m) Business entries and the like. Writings offered as memoranda or records of acts, conditions or events to prove the facts stated therein, if the following conditions are shown by the testimony of the custodian or other qualified witness, or by a certification that complies with K.S.A. 60-465(b)(7) or (8), and amendments thereto: (1) They were made in the regular course of a business at or about the time of the act, condition or event recorded; and (2) the sources of information from which made and the method and circumstances of their preparation were such as to indicate their trustworthiness.
If the procedure specified by K.S.A. 60-245a(b), and amendments thereto, for providing business records has been complied with and no party has required the personal attendance of a custodian of the records or the production of the original records, the affidavit or declaration of the custodian shall be prima facie evidence that the records satisfy the requirements of this subsection.
(n) Absence of entry in business records. Evidence of the absence of a memorandum or record from the memoranda or records of a business of an asserted act, event or condition, to prove the nonoccurrence of the act or event, or the nonexistence of the condition, if the judge finds that it was the regular course of that business to make such memoranda of all such acts, events or conditions at the time thereof or within a reasonable time thereafter and to preserve them.
(o) Content of official record. Subject to K.S.A. 60-461, and amendments thereto: (1) If meeting the requirements of authentication under K.S.A. 60-465, and amendments thereto, to prove the content of the record, a writing purporting to be a copy of an official record or of an entry therein; (2) to prove the absence of a record in a specified office, a writing made by the official custodian of the official records of the office, reciting diligent search and failure to find such record; or (3) to prove the absence of a record in the criminal justice information system central repository maintained by the Kansas bureau of investigation pursuant to K.S.A. 22-4705, and amendments thereto, a writing made by a person purporting to be an official custodian of the records of the Kansas bureau of investigation, reciting diligent search of criminal history record information and electronically stored information, as defined in K.S.A. 22-4701, and amendments thereto, and failure to find such record.
(p) Certificate of marriage. Subject to K.S.A. 60-461, and amendments thereto, certificates that the maker thereof performed marriage ceremonies, to prove the truth of the recitals thereof, if the judge finds that: (1) The maker of the certificates, at the time and place certified as the times and places of the marriages, was authorized by law to perform marriage ceremonies; and (2) the certificate was issued at that time or within a reasonable time thereafter.
(q) Records of documents affecting an interest in property. Subject to K.S.A. 60-461, and amendments thereto, the official record of a document purporting to establish or affect an interest in property, to prove the content of the original recorded document and its execution and delivery by each person by whom it purports to have been executed, if the judge finds that: (1) The record is in fact a record of an office of a state or nation or of any governmental subdivision thereof; and (2) an applicable statute authorized such a document to be recorded in that office.
(r) Judgment of previous conviction. Evidence of a final judgment adjudging a person guilty of a felony, to prove any fact essential to sustain the judgment.
(s) Judgment against persons entitled to indemnity. To prove the wrong of the adverse party and the amount of damages sustained by the judgment creditor, evidence of a final judgment if offered by a judgment debtor in an action in which the debtor seeks to recover partial or total indemnity or exoneration for money paid or liability incurred by the debtor because of the judgment, provided the judge finds that the judgment was rendered for damages sustained by the judgment creditor as a result of the wrong of the adverse party to the present action.
(t) Judgment determining public interest in land. To prove any fact which was essential to the judgment, evidence of a final judgment determining the interest or lack of interest of the public or of a state or nation or governmental division thereof in land, if offered by a party in an action in which any such fact or such interest or lack of interest is a material matter.
(u) Statement concerning one's own family history. A statement of a matter concerning a declarant's own birth, marriage, divorce, legitimacy, relationship by blood or marriage, race-ancestry or other similar fact of the declarant's family history, even though the declarant had no means of acquiring personal knowledge of the matter declared, if the judge finds that the declarant is unavailable.
(v) Statement concerning family history of another. A statement concerning the birth, marriage, divorce, death, legitimacy, race-ancestry, relationship by blood or marriage or other similar fact of the family history of a person other than the declarant if the judge finds that the declarant: (1) Was related to the other by blood or marriage, or was otherwise so intimately associated with the other's family as to be likely to have accurate information concerning the matter declared, and made the statement as upon information received from the other or from a person related by blood or marriage to the other or as upon repute in the other's family; and (2) is unavailable as a witness.
(w) Statement concerning family history based on statement of another declarant. A statement of a declarant that a statement admissible under the exceptions in subsections (u) or (v) was made by another declarant, offered as tending to prove the truth of the matter declared by both declarants, if the judge finds that both declarants are unavailable as witnesses.
(x) Reputation in family concerning family history. Evidence of reputation among members of a family, if the reputation concerns the birth, marriage, divorce, death, legitimacy, race-ancestry or other fact of the family history of a member of the family by blood or marriage.
(y) Reputation—boundaries, general history, family history. Evidence of reputation in a community as tending to prove the truth of the matter reputed, if the reputation concerns: (1) Boundaries of or customs affecting, land in the community and the judge finds that the reputation, if any, arose before controversy; (2) an event of general history of the community or of the state or nation of which the community is a part and the judge finds that the event was of importance to the community; or (3) the birth, marriage, divorce, death, legitimacy, relationship by blood or marriage, or race-ancestry of a person resident in the community at the time of the reputation, or some other similar fact of the person's family history or of the person's personal status or condition which the judge finds likely to have been the subject of a reliable reputation in that community.
(z) Reputation as to character. If a trait of a person's character at a specified time is material, evidence of the person's reputation with reference thereto at a relevant time in the community in which the person then resided or in a group with which the person then habitually associated, to prove the truth of the matter reputed.
(aa) Recitals in documents affecting property. Evidence of a statement relevant to a material matter, contained in a deed of conveyance or a will or other document purporting to affect an interest in property, offered as tending to prove the truth of the matter stated, if the judge finds that: (1) The matter stated would be relevant upon an issue as to an interest in the property; and (2) the dealings with the property since the statement was made have not been inconsistent with the truth of the statement.
(bb) Commercial lists and the like. Evidence of statements of matters of interest to persons engaged in an occupation contained in a list, register, periodical or other published compilation, to prove the truth of any relevant matter so stated, if the judge finds that the compilation is published for use by persons engaged in that occupation and is generally used and relied upon by them.
(cc) Learned treatises. A published treatise, periodical or pamphlet on a subject of history, science or art, to prove the truth of a matter stated therein, if the judge takes judicial notice, or a witness expert in the subject testifies, that the treatise, periodical or pamphlet is a reliable authority in the subject.
(dd) Actions involving children. In a criminal proceeding or a proceeding pursuant to the revised Kansas juvenile justice code or in a proceeding to determine if a child is a child in need of care under the revised Kansas code for care of children, a statement made by a child, to prove the crime or that a child is a juvenile offender or a child in need of care, if:
(1) The child is alleged to be a victim of the crime or offense or a child in need of care; and
(2) the trial judge finds, after a hearing on the matter, that the child is disqualified or unavailable as a witness, the statement is apparently reliable and the child was not induced to make the statement falsely by use of threats or promises.
If a statement is admitted pursuant to this subsection in a trial to a jury, the trial judge shall instruct the jury that it is for the jury to determine the weight and credit to be given the statement and that, in making the determination, it shall consider the age and maturity of the child, the nature of the statement, the circumstances under which the statement was made, any possible threats or promises that might have been made to the child to obtain the statement and any other relevant factor.
(ee) Certified motor vehicle certificate of title history. Subject to K.S.A. 60-461, and amendments thereto, a certified motor vehicle certificate of title history prepared by the division of vehicles of the Kansas department of revenue.
History: L. 1963, ch. 303, 60-460; L. 1982, ch. 246, § 1; L. 1985, ch. 196, § 3; L. 1986, ch. 135, § 3; L. 1988, ch. 211, § 9; L. 1996, ch. 229, § 116; L. 2006, ch. 169, § 115; L. 2007, ch. 195, § 30; L. 2011, ch. 48, § 16; L. 2016, ch. 31, § 3; L. 2021, ch. 65, § 1; July 1.
Source or prior law:
(m). G.S. 1868, ch. 80, § 387; L. 1909, ch. 182, § 384; R.S. 1923, 60-2869.
(o). G.S. 1868, ch. 80, § 372; L. 1905, ch. 323, § 1; L. 1909, ch. 182, § 369; R.S. 1923, 60-2854.
(p). G.S. 1868, ch. 80, §§ 380, 381; L. 1909, ch. 182, §§ 377, 378; R.S. 1923, 60-2862, 60-2863.
(q). G.S. 1868, ch. 80, § 372; L. 1905, ch. 323, § 1; L. 1909, ch. 182, § 369; R.S. 1923, 60-2854.
Cross References to Related Sections:
Use of deposition taken before action taken, see 60-227.
Preliminary inquiry by judge as to admissibility generally, see 60-408.
Law Review and Bar Journal References:
"Highlights of the Kansas Code of Civil Procedure (1963)," Spencer A. Gard, 2 W.L.J. 199, 215 (1962).
Subsections (a), (c), (d), (j), (l), (m) and (cc); survey of law of evidence, Spencer A. Gard, 12 K.L.R. 239, 247, 249, 250, 251, 252, 253, 254 (1963).
Detailed discussion of paragraphs (d) and (e) and related case law, M. C. Slough, 13 K.L.R. 197 (1964).
Effect on existing case law discussed, Spencer A. Gard, 14 K.L.R. 263, 268, 269 (1965).
Paragraph (y)(3) cited in comment on illegitimacy in Kansas, Donald W. Vasos, 14 K.L.R. 473, 482 (1966).
Effect of paragraph (a) modified by rules of certain district courts, D. Keith Anderson, 6 W.L.J. 113, 119, 120, 121, 122, 125 (1966).
Section is statutory statement of a long-followed rule providing hearsay exception as to co-conspirator's statements, Spencer A. Gard, 16 K.L.R. 125, 127, 136 (1967).
Paragraphs (bb) and (cc) cited in discussion on admissibility of learned treatises, Edward G. Collister, Jr., 17 K.L.R. 167, 175, 177, 178 (1968).
Application of section to proceedings in juvenile court questioned, Richard H. Seaton, 16 K.L.R. 277, 282 (1968).
Subsections (m) and (n) cited in "Evidence: The Admissibility of Computer Print-outs in Kansas," Thomas E. Lowman, 8 W.L.J. 330, 335, 336, 337 (1969).
Subsection (a) discussed in detail as related to "past recollection recorded," Dennis J. Stewart, 12 W.L.J. 151 (1973).
Subsections (m) and (n); discussion of consumer protection in Tenth Judicial District, William P. Coates, Jr., 44 J.B.A.K. 67, 104 (1975).
"Guilty Plea Not Admissible in Subsequent Civil Suit Based Upon the Same Occurrence," Janean Meigs, 24 K.L.R. 193, 199 (1975).
Subsection (c)(2); survey of criminal law, Dan Walter and Dick Ring, 15 W.L.J. 341, 344 (1976).
Conspiracy law, 26 K.L.R. 571, 588 (1978).
"Survey of Kansas Law: Evidence," Spencer A. Gard, 27 K.L.R. 225 (1979).
"Kansas Diversion: Defendant's Remedies and Prosecutorial Opportunities," Joseph Brian Cox, 20 W.L.J. 344, 373 (1981).
"Survey of Kansas Law: Evidence," 29 K.L.R. 497, 507, 508 (1981).
"Rehabilitative Devices," Laurence Rose, 2 J.K.T.L.A. No. 1, 17, 18 (1978).
"Objections," Laurence Rose, 2 J.K.T.L.A. No. 3, 18 (1978).
"The New Kansas Law Regarding Admissibility of Child-Victim Hearsay Statements," G. Joseph Pierron, 52 J.K.B.A. 88, 90, 91, 92, 93 (1983).
"The Admissibility of Child Victim Hearsay in Kansas: A Defense Perspective," Christopher B. McNeil, 23 W.L.J. 265, 272, 283 (1984).
"Survey of Kansas Law: Juvenile Law," Sheila Reynolds, 32 K.L.R. 371, 380 (1984).
"Survey of Kansas Law: Evidence," Mark M. Dobson, 32 K.L.R. 625, 626, 658, 667 (1984).
"A proposal for the Use of Otherwise Inadmissible Hearsay in Kansas Preliminary Examinations," Emil A. Tonkovich, 32 K.L.R. 837 (1984).
"The Insanity Defense in Kansas: Procedure and Practice," Jack Peggs, 53 J.K.B.A. 187 (1984).
"Lead Column; Admitting Government Findings in Federal Civil Cases," James E. Concannon, Vol. 6, No. 6, J.K.T.L.A. 9 (1983).
"Warning: Failure to Counter an Objection may be Hazardous to Your Case," Vol. IX, No. 2, J.K.T.L.A. 23 (1985).
"A Fresh Look at Hypothetical Questions and Ultimate Issues: The Kansas Experience," Stanley D. Davis, 36 K.L.R. 311, 320, 328 (1988).
"Co-Conspirator Hearsay in Federal and Kansas Jurisdictions After Bourjaily v. United States," Brian Burris and Gary Nelson, 27 W.L.J. 528, 550, 560, 565, 568 (1988).
"Exceptions to the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause: Kansas Clarifies the Child Victim Exception [State v. Chisholm, 245 Kan. 145, 777 P.2d 753 (1989])," Anthony J. Powell, 29 W.L.J. 652, 655 (1990).
"Forensic Psychiatry: Less Typical Applications," Roy B. Lacoursiere, M.D., 30 W.L.J. 29, 34 (1990).
"Child Victim Hearsay Exception Under K.S.A. 60-460(dd)," Judge Tom Malone, J.K.T.L.A. Vol. XV, No. 5, 9, 10, 11, 12 (1992).
"Evidence: Can What I Said Be Held Against Me?: Admitting Settlement Agreements and Prior Pleadings in Multiple-Defendant Comparative Negligence Actions[Lytle v. Stearns, 830 P.2d 1197 (Kan. 1992)]," Patrick Hughes, 32 W.L.J. 260, 263 (1993).
"The Child Victim/Witness: Balancing of Defendant/Victim Rights in the Emotional Caldron of a Criminal Trial," Thomas D. Haney, 62 J.K.B.A. No. 1, 38, 40 (1993).
"An Honest Confession is Good for the State," Roger W. Badeker, 62 J.K.B.A. No. 7, 20, 21, 24 (1993).
"Kansas State Court Appellate Standards of Review: An Understanding Unblinded," Robert W. Parnacott, 62 J.K.B.A. No. 10, 34, 36 (1993).
"Constitutional Law: Kansans Have No Reasonable Expectation of Privacy in Bank or Telephone Records [State v. Schultz, 850 P.2d 818 (Kan. 1993)]," Kyle Steadman, 33 W.L.J. 466, 481 (1994).
"Will Contests in Kansas," Dennis M. Feeney & Jeffery L. Carmichael, 64 J.K.B.A. No. 7, 22, 25 (1995).
"Trial Techniques in Persuasion in a Medical Malpractice Case," Bradley J. Prochaska, J.K.T.L.A. Vol. XIX, No. 2, 8 (1995).
"Res Gestae Raises Its Ugly Head," Dennis D. Prater and Virginia M. Klemme, 65 J.K.B.A. No. 8, 24 (1996).
"Evidentiary Ideas in Defending Driving Under the Influence Charges," Timothy G. Riling, J.K.T.L.A. Vol. XX, No. 1, 20 (1996).
"The Marital Discord Exemption to Hearsay: Fact or Judicially Legislated Fiction?" Christine Arguello, 46 K.L.R. 63 (1997).
"On the Admissibility of Expert Testimony in Kansas," Mark D. Hinderks and Steve Leben, 66 J.K.B.A. No. 9, 24 (1997).
"Evidence for the family lawyer: Intrafamily wiretapping, the Fifth Amendment and other selected topics," Steve Leben, 68 J.K.B.A. No. 3, 24 (1999).
"Establishing Standards of Care and Conduct Through the Use of Guidelines and Regulations," Matthew L. Bretz, J.K.T.L.A. Vol. XXIII, No. 4, 12 (2000).
"VBAC, Uterine Rupture, and the 30-Minute Rule," Victor A. Bergman, J.K.T.L.A. Vol. XXIII, No. 5, 6 (2000).
"Other Misconduct Evidence," Christopher M. Joseph, 49 K.L.R. 145 (2000).
"Heresay Today, Gone Tomorrow: Child Hearsay After Crawford v. Washington," Daniel E. Monnat and Paige A. Nichols, J.K.T.L.A. Vol. XXVIII, No. 4, 19 (2005).
"Criminal Procedure Survey of Recent Cases," 53 K.L.R. 983 (2005).
"Comparison of Federal and State Court Practice," David G. Seely, Charles E. Millsap and Ron Campbell, 75 J.K.B.A. No. 4, 28 (2006).
"Using Medical Textbooks To Prove Your Case," Bradley J. Prochaska, 35 J.K.A.J. No. 3, 5 (2012).
CASE ANNOTATIONS
Prior law cases, see G.S. 1949, 60-2854, 60-2862, 60-2869 and the 1961 Supp. thereto.
1. Declarations against interest admissible. Pickering v. Hollabaugh, 194 Kan. 804, 808, 401 P.2d 891; Pickering, executrix v. Hollabaugh, executor, 197 Kan. 766, 420 P.2d 1012.
2. Admission of authenticated copies of journal entries of prior convictions of felony proper; defendant subject to Kansas habitual criminal act. State v. Lewis, 195 Kan. 389, 395, 405 P.2d 796.
3. Subsection (g) construed; failure to reply to accusatory statement held to be nonverbal conduct constituting "statement" as defined by K.S.A. 60-459. State v. Shaw, 195 Kan. 677, 681, 408 P.2d 650.
4. Subsection (i) considered in determining admissibility of declarations of co-conspirator. State v. Shaw, 195 Kan. 677, 681, 408 P.2d 650.
5. Applied; admission of involuntary confession erroneous; reversible error. State v. McCarther, 197 Kan. 279, 285, 416 P.2d 290.
6. Statements made by fellow conspirators; admissibility. State v. Adamson, 197 Kan. 486, 490, 419 P.2d 860.
7. Evidence supported finding that confession was voluntarily made. State v. Eldridge, 197 Kan. 694, 697, 421 P.2d 170.
8. Voluntariness of burglary confession; hearing foundation proof of confession in presence of jury. State v. Jones, 198 Kan. 30, 36, 422 P.2d 888. Modified in part: State v. Milow, 199 Kan. 576, 589, 433 P.2d 538.
9. Blood alcohol test inadmissible; failure to lay foundation; business records exception. State v. Foster, 198 Kan. 52, 54, 422 P.2d 964.
10. "Rap sheets" of FBI and KBI held not to be exception. State v. Taylor, 198 Kan. 290, 299, 424 P.2d 612.
11. Person absent from trial but giving deposition not "person who is present." Thompson v. Norman, 198 Kan. 436, 441, 442, 424 P.2d 593.
12. Act broadens prior law permitting declarations against interest; admissibility rests in discretion of court; statement of physical or mental condition of declarant. Thompson v. Norman, 198 Kan. 436, 441, 442, 443, 424 P.2d 593.
13. Trial court's admission of confession satisfied requirements of subsection (f). State v. Brown, 198 Kan. 473, 476, 426 P.2d 129.
14. Statements attributed to declarant exposed him to both civil and criminal liability. Jamaica Time Petroleum, Inc. v. Federal Insurance Company, 366 F.2d 156, 159.
15. Copies of records of penal institution admissible for purpose of applying habitual criminal act. Burnett v. State, 199 Kan. 362, 365, 429 P.2d 923.
16. Testimony of expert witness based upon knowledge gained from books not hearsay use of publications. Casey v. Phillips Pipeline Co., 199 Kan. 538, 547, 431 P.2d 518.
17. Duty of trial court to conduct proceeding considering totality of circumstances in determining voluntariness of confession. State v. Milow, 199 Kan. 576, 579, 433 P.2d 538.
18. Confession determined to be voluntary. State v. Pittman, 199 Kan. 591, 433 P.2d 550.
19. Testimony as to speed of vehicle before collision admissible as exception to hearsay rule. Kirkendoll v. Neustrom, 379 F.2d 694, 697.
20. Mentioned; construction cost index as "learned treatise"; evidence of replacement cost in condemnation proceeding. City of Wichita v. United School District No. 259, 201 Kan. 110, 121, 439 P.2d 162.
21. Proper remedy in situation where certain evidence admissible, pursuant to subsection (g), as to one of two defendants tried jointly, which tends to incriminate the other, is to request court to limit jury's consideration of such evidence. State v. Cantrell, 201 Kan. 182, 188, 440 P.2d 580.
22. Pursuant to subsection (g), where parties are jointly tried, statements made by one party are admissible as to issues relating to that party. State v. Cantrell, 201 Kan. 182, 188, 440 P.2d 580.
23. The question of whether prejudice results when a statement or declaration is introduced which implicates another defendant on a joint trial is for trial judge's determination in exercise of sound judicial discretion. State v. Cantrell, 201 Kan. 182, 188, 440 P.2d 580.
24. Subsection (g) authorizes the admissibility of voluntary statements made by accused to investigating officer prior to filing of charges where accused's constitutional rights are met. State v. Weinman, 201 Kan. 190, 194, 440 P.2d 575.
25. Voluntary statements, which tend to incriminate, made by an accused to law enforcement officers after being advised of constitutional rights are admissible in evidence as an exception to hearsay rule under subsection (g). State v. Weinman, 201 Kan. 190, 194, 440 P.2d 575.
26. Statements made in absence of defendant inadmissible; evidence insufficient as a matter of law to sustain verdict. State v. Doyle, 201 Kan. 470, 487, 441 P.2d 846.
27. Mentioned; amendment of sheriff's return after judgment disallowed; prejudice to substantial rights of parties. Transport Clearing House, Inc. v. Rostock, 202 Kan. 72, 80, 447 P.2d 1.
28. Subsection (h)(2) applied; an incriminating statement of third person which accused has admitted to be true is admissible in evidence as accused's own statement by adoption. State v. Greer, 202 Kan. 212, 214, 447 P.2d 837.
29. Paragraph (i) applied; evidence of acts and declaration of co-conspirator held admissible. State v. Trotter, 203 Kan. 31, 36, 453 P.2d 93.
30. Admissibility in evidence of certain checks as exception to hearsay rule. State v. Young, 203 Kan. 296, 302, 454 P.2d 724.
31. Medical records of hospitalization and treatment of penitentiary inmate at research and diagnostic center admissible under subsection (m). In re Estate of Bernatzki, 204 Kan. 131, 134, 139, 460 P.2d 527.
32. Special credit report admissible under subsection (m). Phillip Van Heusen, Inc. v. Korn, 204 Kan. 172, 176, 177, 460 P.2d 549.
33. In case concerning operation of an emergency vehicle, evidence properly admitted hereunder. Scogin v. Nugen, 204 Kan. 568, 571, 464 P.2d 166.
34. Court did not hear evidence outside presence of jury to determine as a preliminary matter the voluntariness of defendant's confession. Baker v. State, 204 Kan. 607, 615, 464 P.2d 212.
35. Subsection (a) cited in case allowing testimony of a seven year old witness. State v. Jones, 204 Kan. 719, 720, 728, 466 P.2d 283.
36. Testimony properly admitted as an assertion against declarant's interest. State v. Parrish, 205 Kan. 178, 182, 468 P.2d 143.
37. Subsection (m) construed; record of sale of murder weapon by pawnshop admissible as exception to hearsay rule, with respect to business records. State v. Beasley, 205 Kan. 253, 256, 257, 469 P.2d 453.
38. Subsection (m) discussed in admission of "books of account" under the "shop book" exception. State v. Addington, 205 Kan. 640, 652, 472 P.2d 225.
39. Attempt to admit federal aviation agency reports under various subsections hereof discussed. Pacific Indemnity Co. v. Berge, 205 Kan. 755, 763, 764, 473 P.2d 48.
40. Statement of accused inadmissible if made under threats or promises made by person that accused reasonably believed had power to execute same. State v. Stuart, 206 Kan. 11, 476 P.2d 975.
41. Where county attorney apparently sanctions actions of members of burglarized Elks Club, admissions made to them by accused under threats or promises are inadmissible. State v. Stuart, 206 Kan. 11, 15, 476 P.2d 975.
42. Determination of reliability of learned treatise under subsection (cc) rests in sound discretion of trial court. Zimmer v. State, 206 Kan. 304, 309, 477 P.2d 971.
43. Paragraph (2) of subsection (c) codifies court decisions that testimony of witness at preliminary hearing may be used at trial where "good faith effort" is made to locate absent witness for trial. State v. Washington, 206 Kan. 336, 338, 339, 479 P.2d 833.
44. Subsection (z) discussed; in cross-examination of defendant's character witness, inquiry must be directed to the witness' "hearing" of disparaging rumor as negativing the reputation; no question as to "fact" of the misconduct permissible. State v. Hinton, 206 Kan. 500, 505, 506, 507, 479 P.2d 910.
45. Physical evidence is not hearsay evidence. State v. Boyd, 206 Kan. 597, 599, 481 P.2d 1015.
46. A report of the United States weather bureau is admissible into evidence as publication of occupational interest under the provisions of subsection (bb) hereof. Ballhorst v. Hahner-Foreman-Cale, Inc., 207 Kan. 89, 96, 484 P.2d 38.
47. A report of the United States weather bureau is admissible into evidence as an official record under the provisions of subsection (o) hereof. Ballhorst v. Hahner-Foreman-Cale, Inc., 207 Kan. 89, 96, 484 P.2d 38.
48. Subsection (o) mentioned; federal aviation administration report relating to airplane crash admissible hereunder. Pierce v. Der Wienerschnitzel International, Inc., 313 F. Supp. 740, 741, 745 (1970).
49. Subsection (a) considered and held not applicable where defendant in criminal case refused to testify on grounds of possible self-incrimination. State v. Hale, 207 Kan. 446, 452, 485 P.2d 1338.
50. Subsection (a) cited in considering evidence of turncoat witness. State v. Lott, 207 Kan. 602, 605, 606, 485 P.2d 1314.
51. Statement admitted in evidence under hearsay exception held not reversible error. McGlothlin v. Wiles, 207 Kan. 718, 725, 487 P.2d 533.
52. Extrinsic evidence must be introduced showing agency relationship before agency exception to hearsay rule may be evoked. State v. Nirschl, 208 Kan. 111, 114, 115, 490 P.2d 917.
53. Deposition taken in another action admissible where witness not available; findings. Grubb, Administrator v. Grubb, 208 Kan. 484, 486, 493 P.2d 189.
54. Subsection (m) cited; ledger sheets properly admitted. Jay-Ox, Inc. v. Square Deal Junk Co., Inc., 208 Kan. 856, 859, 494 P.2d 1103.
55. Subsection (d) and (g) cited; contemporaneous statement; held, trial court's actions deprived defendant of a fair trial. State v. Blake, 209 Kan. 196, 201, 495 P.2d 905.
56. Evidence of conspiracy admissible to show furtherance of common criminal design; no conspiracy charged. State v. Campbell, 210 Kan. 265, 277, 500 P.2d 21.
57. Extrajudicial testimonial statements of persons claiming privilege against self-incrimination inadmissible as hearsay; burglary conviction reversed. State v. Oliphant, 210 Kan. 451, 453, 502 P.2d 626.
58. Subsection (a) mentioned; unavailable witness; recorded testimony at former trial and prior contradictory statement properly admitted. State v. Ford, 210 Kan. 491, 495, 496, 502 P.2d 786.
59. Applied; exhibits offered as judicial admission as circumstantial evidence, and plea of guilty to another offense, admissible. State v. Calvert, 211 Kan. 174, 181, 182, 505 P.2d 1110.
60. Declarant's statements in police tape recordings admissible under subsection (d)(3) where declarant claimed fifth amendment privilege against self-incrimination. State v. Hill, 211 Kan. 287, 298, 507 P.2d 342.
61. Testimony concerning statements made by person testifying not inadmissible as hearsay. Hastings v. Ross, 211 Kan. 732, 734, 508 P.2d 514.
62. Voluntariness of statement admitted to by defendant at hearing; held properly admitted. State v. Reidel, 211 Kan. 872, 876, 508 P.2d 878.
63. Subsection (cc) cited; medical texts introduced hereunder in malpractice case. Karrigan v. Nazareth Convent & Academy, Inc., 212 Kan. 44, 50, 510 P.2d 190.
64. List of tool inventory held properly admitted as business entry under subsection (m). State v. Newman, 213 Kan. 178, 180, 515 P.2d 814.
65. Mentioned; police officer's testimony concerning what agent told him admissible under subsection (a). State v. Bagemehl, 213 Kan. 210, 214, 515 P.2d 1104.
66. Error in admission of hearsay evidence in proceeding to terminate parental rights held harmless. In re Johnson, 214 Kan. 780, 782, 783, 784, 522 P.2d 330.
67. Negligence action against nurse; hospital records admissible as business records subject to scrutiny of jury. Hiatt v. Groce, 215 Kan. 14, 22, 523 P.2d 320.
68. Police officer's testimony based on statement by party to collision held not admissible as substantive evidence. Smith v. Estate of Hall, 215 Kan. 262, 264, 265, 266, 524 P.2d 684.
69. Letters and reports in files of highway commission not rendered inadmissible because opposing party lacked knowledge of contents. Friesen v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Rld., 215 Kan. 316, 324, 524 P.2d 1141.
70. Mentioned; testimony concerning conversation between defendants and another in perjury prosecution allowed. State v. Craig, 215 Kan. 381, 384, 524 P.2d 679.
71. Conviction of second degree murder; admission of hearsay evidence held harmless error. State v. Wilson, 215 Kan. 437, 441, 524 P.2d 224.
72. Evidence concerning statements made by an out-of-court declarant not inadmissible; nontestimonial in character. State v. Ralls, 216 Kan. 692, 694, 533 P.2d 1294.
73. Applied; testimony of police officer in burglary prosecution hearsay and improperly admitted. State v. Carson, 216 Kan. 711, 713, 533 P.2d 1342.
74. Construed with K.S.A. 60-459; transcript testimony of prosecution witness at preliminary hearing allowed. State v. Bey, 217 Kan. 251, 253, 535 P.2d 881.
75. Hearsay evidence held admissible where declarant present and available for cross examination. State v. Ralph, 217 Kan. 457, 459, 537 P.2d 200.
76. Paragraph (a) applied; previous statement of person present and available for cross examination admissible. State v. Taylor, 217 Kan. 706, 712, 713, 538 P.2d 1375.
77. Subsection (i) applied; reformation of lease upheld; out of court declaration held admissible as exception to hearsay rule. Schlatter v. Ibarra, 218 Kan. 67, 71, 542 P.2d 710.
78. Applied; conflicting statements of defendant as to whereabouts at time of crime admissible. State v. Donahue, 218 Kan. 351, 354, 355, 543 P.2d 962.
79. Section applicable to all juvenile proceedings; subsection (m) discussed; inadmissible hearsay received in waiver hearing under K.S.A. 38-808; reversed. In re Harris, 218 Kan. 625, 627, 544 P.2d 1403.
80. Admissability of testimony hereunder discussed; no error in refusal to allow corroborating testimony when credibility of defendant's statements attacked. State v. Watkins, 219 Kan. 81, 87, 547 P.2d 810.
81. Subsection (c) applied; no error in allowance of testimony given in former trial of same action. State v. Steward, 219 Kan. 256, 262, 263, 547 P.2d 773.
82. Evidence of the reading of the Miranda rights was not hearsay. State v. McClain, 220 Kan. 80, 81, 551 P.2d 806.
83. Fingerprint cards received under K.S.A. 21-2501 admissible as business entries hereunder. State v. Rives, 220 Kan. 141, 144, 551 P.2d 788.
84. Section inapplicable to support finding by court of ownership of car. Motors Insurance Corporation v. Richardson, 220 Kan. 288, 290, 552 P.2d 894.
85. Evidence concerning photographs offered simply as explanation of appellant's action properly excluded. State v. Wilson, 220 Kan. 341, 552 P.2d 931.
86. Testimony offered only to show presence at a location and not to prove truth of informant's statement admissible. State v. Crowley, 220 Kan. 532, 536, 552 P.2d 971.
87. Applied; substantial evidence supported trial court's finding that confession was voluntarily given. State v. Harwick, 220 Kan. 572, 576, 552 P.2d 987.
88. Trial court did not abuse discretion in admitting records as evidence; section does not require custodian to identify them. Olathe Ready-Mix Co., Inc. v. Frazier, 220 Kan. 646, 647, 556 P.2d 198.
89. Information relayed to officer in course of investigation solely for explanation of action was not hearsay; hearsay defined. State v. Laubach, 220 Kan. 679, 682, 556 P.2d 405.
90. Hearsay statement outside exception of subsection (d)(3); inadmissible. State v. Brown, 220 Kan. 684, 686, 687, 688, 556 P.2d 443.
91. Document properly admitted to prove convictions as exception to hearsay rule (subsection (o)). State v. Moore, 220 Kan. 707, 711, 556 P.2d 409.
92. Paragraph (f) applied; confession properly admitted; conviction of crimes affirmed. State v. Kanive, 221 Kan. 34, 35, 37, 558 P.2d 1075.
93. Voluntary incriminating statements made by accused during course of polygraph examination held admissible. State v. Blosser, 221 Kan. 59, 62, 558 P.2d 105.
94. Foundation testimony sufficient to support finding of merchandise value. State v. Spray, 221 Kan. 67, 558 P.2d 129.
95. Exclusion of hearsay statement made by defendant at time and for purposes offered not error; conviction affirmed. State v. King, 221 Kan. 69, 72, 557 P.2d 1262.
96. Testimony concerning the receiving of anonymous telephone call was proper to explain actions of officer. State v. Thompson, 221 Kan. 176, 179, 558 P.2d 1079.
97. No error in admission of evidence in prosecution for aggravated burglary. State v. Alderdice, 221 Kan. 684, 686, 687, 561 P.2d 845.
98. Spontaneous res gestae statement made by spouse to third party admissible in evidence hereunder. State v. Childers, 222 Kan. 32, 46, 47, 563 P.2d 999.
99. Subsection (a) applied; previous statement of person present and available for cross-examination admissible. State v. Clark, 222 Kan. 65, 70, 71, 563 P.2d 1028.
100. Reversible error in admission of out-of-court statements; defendant's sixth amendment right to effective cross-examination violated. State v. Fisher, 222 Kan. 76, 78, 79, 82, 563 P.2d 1012.
101. Conviction of sale of heroin reversed; hearsay evidence. State v. Collazo, 1 Kan. App. 2d 654, 655, 656, 574 P.2d 214.
102. Paragraph (c)(2) applied; right of defendant to confront witness determined; test of unavailability. State v. Davis, 2 Kan. App. 2d 10, 11, 573 P.2d 1124.
103. Evidence taken and recorded in hospital records (blood tests) seven days before crime committed held admissible. State v. Bircher, 2 Kan. App. 2d 15, 17, 573 P.2d 1128.
104. Hearsay testimony properly admitted under subsection (a); statements made by persons available for cross examination. State v. Marshall & Brown- Sidorowicz, 2 Kan. App. 2d 182, 577 P.2d 803.
105. Subsection (i) applied; conspiracy clearly established; immaterial whether prima facie case established before or after introduction of hearsay evidence. State v. Marshall & Brown-Sidorowicz, 2 Kan. App. 2d 182, 577 P.2d 803.
106. Hearsay statements made by co-conspirators after conspiracy admissible under subsection (i). State v. Marshall & Brown-Sidorowicz, 2 Kan. App. 2d 182, 577 P.2d 803.
107. Subsection (i) not unavailable merely because co-conspirators were acquitted. State v. Marshall & Brown-Sidorowicz, 2 Kan. App. 2d 182, 205, 577 P.2d 803.
108. Learned treatise not admitted; failure to establish reliability. State v. McDonald, 222 Kan. 494, 495, 565 P.2d 267.
109. Formal action under K.S.A. 8-234 requires formal order; constitutes an official record under this section. City of Overland Park v. Rice, 222 Kan. 693, 698, 567 P.2d 1382.
110. Construed and applied; statements of person present when conspiracy consummated admissible; part of res gestae. State v. Roberts, 223 Kan. 49, 59, 60, 574 P.2d 164.
111. Physical objects connected with crime properly admitted in evidence. State v. Martin, 223 Kan. 78, 79, 573 P.2d 576.
112. Statements in criminal prosecution for murder held admissible under subsection (d)(3). State v. Adams, 223 Kan. 254, 255, 573 P.2d 604.
113. Applied in allowing reading of preliminary transcript of testimony at trial; unavailability of witness. State v. Watie, Heard and Heard, 223 Kan. 337, 340, 343, 574 P.2d 1368.
114. Hearsay statement allowed although not made contemporaneously with the event described. State v. Berry, 223 Kan. 566, 568, 575 P.2d 543.
115. Allowing testimony of co-conspirator prior to independent proof of conspiracy not error. State v. Moody, 223 Kan. 699, 701, 576 P.2d 637.
116. Admissions by former employees not within scope of subsections (g), (h) and (i) of this section. Miller v. Sirloin Stockade, 224 Kan. 32, 34, 578 P.2d 247.
117. Confession under subsection (f) admissible only against defendant who made it; conviction reversed. State v. Sullivan, 224 Kan. 110, 112, 578 P.2d 1108.
118. Cited; confession inadmissible under subsection (h); conviction reversed. State v. Sullivan, 224 Kan. 110, 119, 578 P.2d 1108.
119. Statement by witness invoking privilege against self-incrimination held inadmissible under subsections (a) and (c). State v. Sanders, 224 Kan. 138, 144, 578 P.2d 702.
120. Fingerprint card admissible under subsection (m). State v. Sanders, 224 Kan. 138, 146, 578 P.2d 702.
121. Cited; statement of deceased admissible; not offered to prove the fact asserted. State v. Phipps, 224 Kan. 158, 160, 578 P.2d 709.
122. Statement or confession admissible only against person making the statement or confession. State v. Edwards, 224 Kan. 266, 579 P.2d 1209.
123. Court erred in admitting double hearsay evidence; conviction of felony murder reversed. State v. Baker, 224 Kan. 474, 475, 580 P.2d 1345.
124. Error in admission of former testimony not prejudicial; due process not violated. State v. Smith & Miller, 224 Kan. 662, 667, 585 P.2d 1006. Motion for rehearing denied, 225 Kan. 199, 588 P.2d 953.
125. Confessions of codefendants offered to show statements made were inconsistent; not hearsay; admissible. State v. White & Stewart, 225 Kan. 87, 95, 587 P.2d 1259.
126. Admissibility of deceased trooper's diagram upheld; section construed. Timsah v. General Motors Corp., 225 Kan. 305, 309, 310, 311, 313, 319, 591 P.2d 154.
127. Hearsay rules hereunder applicable to juvenile court proceedings. In re Kerns, 225 Kan. 746, 750, 594 P.2d 187.
128. Proffered evidence inadmissible under subsection (m) (business records exception); aggravated battery conviction affirmed. State v. Davis, 2 Kan. App. 2d 698, 699, 705, 706, 587 P.2d 3.
129. Business records from outside source held not admissible; failure to comply with K.S.A. 22-3716. State v. Guhl, 3 Kan. App. 2d 59, 60, 61, 588 P.2d 957.
130. Declaration against penal interest offered to trial court; evidence excluded as hearsay; subsection (j) exception held applicable; reversed. State v. Quick, 226 Kan. 308, 315, 316, 317, 597 P.2d 1108.
131. Subsection (d) and (j) cited; no abuse of judicial discretion in disallowing declaration against interest. State v. Prince, 227 Kan. 137, 146, 147, 605 P.2d 563.
132. Mentioned; trial court did not err in allowing deposition of an absent witness to be read to the jury; conviction affirmed. State v. Hernandez, 227 Kan. 322, 328, 607 P.2d 452.
133. Subsection (c)(2) applied; multiple hearsay admissible as prior trial transcript where defendant had opportunity to cross-examine. State v. Baker, 227 Kan. 377, 380, 607 P.2d 61.
134. Testimony at prior hearing inadmissible under (a) if defendant had no opportunity to cross-examine at prior hearing and witness refuses to testify at trial. State v. Lomax & Williams, 227 Kan. 651, 657, 658, 659, 608 P.2d 959.
135. Failure to allow subsection (a) declarant to be cross-examined held not reversible error. Belluomo v. KAKE TV & Radio, Inc., 3 Kan. App. 2d 461, 475, 596 P.2d 832.
136. Hearsay evidence in social worker report admissible in juvenile proceeding under subsection (a); other objections governed by contemporaneous objection rule. In re Collins, 3 Kan. App. 2d 585, 586, 598 P.2d 1075.
137. Rules for determining admissibility of confessions reviewed and applied; voluntariness, effect of alcohol, drugs, promises solicited by defendant. State v. Baker, 4 Kan. App. 2d 340, 341, 342, 343, 344, 606 P.2d 120.
138. Prior hearsay statements of "turncoat witness" admissible as substantive evidence. State v. Holt, 228 Kan. 16, 21, 24, 612 P.2d 570.
139. Written statements of witness not admitted when witness refused to testify on 5 th amendment grounds and therefore not subject to cross-examination. State v. Bryant, 228 Kan. 239, 247, 248, 613 P.2d 1348.
140. Previous voluntary statement by accused related to offense charged admissible only against accused hereunder; exception to hearsay rule. State v. Hutchinson, 228 Kan. 279, 281, 615 P.2d 138.
141. Severance of parental rights based on testimony and opinions of expert witness discussed. In re Watson, 5 Kan. App. 2d 277, 278, 615 P.2d 801.
142. Indecent liberties case; question of propriety of statements of prosecution in closing argument; necessity for instruction on attempt and hearsay evidence question side issues. State v. Gilley, 5 Kan. App. 2d 321, 325, 615 P.2d 827.
143. Allowed use of journalism text books in libel suit, under learned treatises exception. Gobin v. Globe Publishing Co., 229 Kan. 1, 5, 620 P.2d 1163.
144. Transcript of the testimony of an absent witness was properly admitted since the testimony was given at the preliminary hearing and the defendant's attorney cross-examined the witness; conviction affirmed. State v. Mick, 229 Kan. 157, 160, 621 P.2d 1006.
145. Statements made by deceased coparticipant to his wife are not admissible at trial of defendant. State v. Myers, 229 Kan. 168, 170, 173, 174, 176, 625 P.2d 1111.
146. Confessions not in nature of depositions; confessions, with sufficient foundation, admissible without signature. State v. Shaffer, 229 Kan. 310, 314, 624 P.2d 440.
147. Judicial restraint implicit in allowing admission in evidence of prior contradictory statements. State v. Garnes, 229 Kan. 368, 371, 624 P.2d 448.
148. Where all possible declarants are alleged as conspirators and were present with each other, overheard conversation among them properly admitted. State v. Rider, Edens & Lemons, 229 Kan. 394, 404, 625 P.2d 425.
149. Exception to hearsay rule in civil action for declarations against pecuniary, proprietary, penal or social interests by one not party to action. Chute v. Old American Ins. Co., 6 Kan. App. 2d 412, 423, 424, 425, 426, 629 P.2d 734 (1981).
150. Police reports admissible to show police awareness of disturbance in action for damages caused by mob. Portwood v. City of Leavenworth, 6 Kan. App. 2d 498, 503, 630 P.2d 162 (1981).
151. Testimony offered to show statement was made, not to prove truth of statement, is not hearsay. State v. Belt, 6 Kan. App. 2d 585, 589, 631 P.2d 674 (1981).
152. Mentioned in action for failure to procure insurance; exercise care duty rule discussed and applied. Marshel Investments, Inc. v. Cohen, 6 Kan. App. 2d 672, 687, 634 P.2d 133 (1981).
153. Subsection cited; evidence of absence of record admissible if regular practice is to make record. Mellies v. National Heritage, Inc., 6 Kan. App. 2d 910, 915, 636 P.2d 215 (1981).
154. No error in refusing to allow testimony as to out-of-court statements of defendant; conviction of second degree murder affirmed. State v. Staab, 230 Kan. 329, 335, 337, 338, 635 P.2d 257 (1981).
155. Transcribed testimony of witness at preliminary hearing is admissible at trial. State v. Warren, 230 Kan. 385, 390, 391, 392, 393, 394, 395, 396, 401, 635 P.2d 1236 (1981).
156. Subsection (i); sufficient evidence of a conspiracy presented prior to admission of taped statement, admissible. State v. Wolf, 7 Kan. App. 2d 398, 403, 404, 643 P.2d 1101 (1982).
157. Written reports of social workers and public health nurse in case severing parental rights held admissible hearsay. In re Price, 7 Kan. App. 2d 477, 484, 644 P.2d 467 (1982).
158. Cited; deposition may be used at hearing in disciplinary proceeding against an attorney if complainant-witness is not subject to subpoena or is unable to attend hearing. State v. Scott, 230 Kan. 564, 567, 639 P.2d 1131 (1982).
159. Defendant may waive subsection (c) protection of meeting witness face-to-face; hearing transcript admissible. State v. Busse, 231 Kan. 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 642 P.2d 972 (1982).
160. Admitting statement of absent witness under subsection (d)(3) and (o) not error, since no threats or promises given under subsection (f). State v. Churchill, 231 Kan. 408, 411, 414, 417, 646 P.2d 1049 (1982).
161. Accident investigation report admitted under subsection (g), Pape v. Kansas Power & Light, 231 Kan. 441, 444, 647 P.2d 320 (1982).
162. Hearsay evidence held admissible hereunder. State v. Chilcote, 7 Kan. App. 2d 685, 686, 647 P.2d 1349 (1982).
163. Trial court did not err in holding third-party statement was hearsay and did not fall under any of the exceptions. State v. Palmer, 8 Kan. App. 2d 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 657 P.2d 1130 (1982).
164. Testimony admissible under (g) not subject to protective order on motion in limine. State v. Korbel, 231 Kan. 657, 660, 647 P.2d 1301 (1982).
165. Pretrial suppression order affirmed; state failed to sustain burden of proving admissibility of extrajudicial statement of defendant. State v. Goering, 8 Kan. App. 2d 338, 340, 656 P.2d 790 (1983).
166. Indecent liberties with child conviction affirmed; hearsay testimony of mother of four-year old victim admissible under contemporaneous statements exception. State v. Rodriquez, 8 Kan. App. 2d 353, 355, 657 P.2d 79 (1983).
167. Policemen's statements were not voluntary when refusal to answer would result in departmental discipline. State v. Mzhickteno, 8 Kan. App. 2d 389, 392, 658 P.2d 1052 (1983).
168. Defendant's exculpatory statement was admissible as exception to hearsay rule (subsection (d)(1) and (2)); record refutes defendant's contention. State v. Heck, 8 Kan. App. 2d 496, 505, 661 P.2d 798 (1983).
169. Subsection (m); home study reports of Oklahoma SRS admitted into evidence is error; no foundation laid for admission as business records. In re Reed, 8 Kan. App. 2d 602, 606, 663 P.2d 675 (1983).
170. Hearsay testimony of police officer in aggravated sodomy trial admissible; victim present and fully cross-examined by defendant. State v. Aldrich, 232 Kan. 783, 784, 658 P.2d 1027 (1983).
171. Tape recordings of highway patrol transmission are writings and are admissible. State v. Rainey, 233 Kan. 13, 16, 17, 660 P.2d 544 (1983).
172. Under facts of case, no "statement" was offered into record; evidence submitted was not hearsay. Arrowhead Constr. Co. v. Essex Corp., 233 Kan. 241, 250, 662 P.2d 1195 (1983).
173. Under subsection (l) videotapes as evidence of defendant's state of mind at time of crime properly excluded because it raised a collateral issue. State v. Garcia, 233 Kan. 589, 597, 664 P.2d 1343 (1983).
174. When a witness claims privilege against self-incrimination, witness is not available for cross-examination within meaning of subsection (a) for the purposes of utilizing prior testimony under subsection (c). State v. Lashly, 233 Kan. 620, 626, 664 P.2d 1358 (1983).
175. Hearsay evidence, though technically inadmissible, may form basis for probable cause in preliminary hearing if substantial basis for credibility. State v. Cremer, 8 Kan. App. 2d 699, 701, 702, 666 P.2d 1200 (1983).
176. Statement relative to existing plan admissible under subsection (i)(2); not required to be in furtherance of conspiracy. State v. Sherry, 233 Kan. 920, 934, 667 P.2d 367 (1983).
177. Newspaper articles not admissible under learned treatise exception hereunder. Powers v. Kansas Power & Light Co., 234 Kan. 89, 102, 671 P.2d 491 (1983).
178. Basis for admission of hearsay statements considered; prior spontaneous statements made by defendant; contemporaneous statements of witness unable to testify. State v. Hobson, 234 Kan. 133, 147, 148, 149, 154, 156, 158, 159, 671 P.2d 1365 (1983).
179. Testimony of deceased from divorce proceeding admissible in subsequent murder trial of spouse. State v. Knapp, 234 Kan. 170, 178, 671 P.2d 520 (1983).
180. Statements made by six-year old concerning defendant admissible under subsection (d)(3). State v. White, 234 Kan. 340, 347, 673 P.2d 1106 (1983).
181. Evidence of prior acts between defendant and victim admissible independent hereof; discordant marital relationship resulting in homicide. State v. Taylor, 234 Kan. 401, 407, 408, 673 P.2d 1140 (1983).
182. Nontestimonial statement in physician's office records not improperly excluded where made five years before automobile accident. Doty v. Wells, 9 Kan. App. 2d 378, 379, 380, 682 P.2d 672 (1984).
183. Bank records and absence of entries thereto properly admitted at preliminary examination under subsections (m) and (n). State v. Cremer, 234 Kan. 594, 601, 676 P.2d 59 (1984).
184. Test for admission of hearsay statements under subsection (d)(3) restated. Price v. Grimes, 234 Kan. 898, 902, 677 P.2d 969 (1984).
185. Mother's testimony at trial as to child's statements permissible hearsay under (dd); Sixth Amendment not violated. State v. Pendelton, 10 Kan. App. 2d 26, 28, 29, 30, 32, 690 P.2d 959 (1984).
186. In oil and gas drilling contract suit, overheard phone conversation between defendant's agents introduced under (i). Plains Resources, Inc. v. Gable, 235 Kan. 580, 588, 675 P.2d 832 (1984).
187. In absence of fully posted corporate ledgers, work papers admissible under paragraph (m). Schraft v. Leis, 236 Kan. 28, 43, 686 P.2d 865 (1984).
188. Admission of out-of-court statements prior to declarant's testimony not violative of Sixth Amendment. State v. Davis, 236 Kan. 538, 540, 541, 694 P.2d 418 (1985).
189. Out-of-court statements by defendant limited by instruction, admissible under subsection (j) where no mention made of codefendants. State v. Pink, 236 Kan. 715, 727, 696 P.2d 358 (1985).
190. Contemporaneous good faith statement by deceased about incident two weeks before crime within res gestae; admissible hereunder. State v. Peterson, 236 Kan. 821, 829, 831, 696 P.2d 387 (1985).
191. Fingerprint impressions retained by police department need no statutory requirement to qualify as business records. State v. Cunningham, 236 Kan. 842, 844, 695 P.2d 1280 (1985).
192. Purpose and function of child-victim hearsay exception in criminal proceedings permitted under (dd) examined in depth; constitutionality considered. State v. Myatt, 237 Kan. 17, 21, 24, 697 P.2d 836 (1985).
193. Copies of attested Kansas court records and authenticated foreign court records constitute competent evidence of prior felony convictions for sentence enhancement. State v. Baker, 237 Kan. 54, 55, 697 P.2d 1267 (1985).
194. Statements made to police and F.B.I. admissible under (a) where person testified at trial. State v. Wise, 237 Kan. 117, 120, 697 P.2d 1295 (1985).
195. Provisions of subsection (dd) inapplicable to proceedings under juvenile offender code (K.S.A. 38-1601 et seq). In re Mary P., 237 Kan. 456, 459, 701 P.2d 681 (1985).
196. Testimony excluded as hearsay as witness unavailable for cross-examination by reason of asserting Fifth Amendment rights; declaration against penal interest not asserted in trial court cannot be asserted on appeal; test of admissibility reviewed. State v. Haislip, 237 Kan. 461, 473, 701 P.2d 909 (1985).
197. Admissibility of defendant's statements and records about past drug and alcohol abuse determined; effect of multiple hearsay (K.S.A. 60-463) noted. State v. Falke, 237 Kan. 668, 678, 703 P.2d 1362 (1985).
198. Failure to present witness in appropriate circumstances (use of videotaped deposition) in compliance with subsection (c) not constitutional violation. State v. Wooldridge, 237 Kan. 737, 740, 703 P.2d 1375 (1985).
199. Documents admissible when taken from defendant during lawful arrest; had independent value merely by possession. State v. Gardner, 10 Kan. App. 2d 408, 411, 701 P.2d 703 (1985).
200. Testimony that third party gave pre-accident notice to defendant could be admissible as affirmative proof. Mastin v. Kansas Power & Light Co., 10 Kan. App. 2d 620, 624, 706 P.2d 476 (1985).
201. Fact defendant had in possession letters sent by victim's wife had independent legal significance in linking them. State v. Yarrington, 238 Kan. 141, 145, 708 P.2d 524 (1985).
202. Hearsay evidence must pass confrontational tests in criminal case; statements of uncharged coconspirator pleading self-incrimination at trial discussed. State v. Bird, 238 Kan. 160, 172, 174, 708 P.2d 946 (1985).
203. Cited; comments on defendant's failure to testify while objecting to testimony regarding statements by defendant discussed. State v. Pursley, 238 Kan. 253, 266, 710 P.2d 1231 (1985).
204. Cited; mechanic's lien statement (K.S.A. 60-1101, 60-1102) verified under oath, based on business records, is sufficient. Star Lumber & Supply Co. v. Capital Constr. Co., 238 Kan. 743, 752, 715 P.2d 11 (1986).
205. No error where improperly admitted hearsay testimony did not prejudicially affect substantial rights when substantial justice done. State v. Lowe, 238 Kan. 755, 765, 715 P.2d 404 (1986).
206. Computer evaluation and interpretation of psychology test (MMPI) do not quality under hearsay exception (m). West v. Martin, 11 Kan. App. 2d 55, 60, 713 P.2d 957 (1986).
207. Testimony of deceased, under (d)(3) proper to show no intention to sell cattle in scheme devised by defendant. State v. Garner, 237 Kan. 227, 242, 699 P.2d 468 (1985).
208. Must hold hearing and make specific findings required by U.S. Supreme Court and subsection (dd) on child's testimony. State v. Lanter, 237 Kan. 309, 310, 699 P.2d 503 (1985).
209. Testimony of unavailable witness (d)(3) properly excluded where incentive to falsify or distort in question. State v. Sanford, 237 Kan. 312, 314, 699 P.2d 506 (1985).
210. Hearsay exceptions (commercial lists under (bb)), raised for first time on appeal need not be considered. State v. Scherer, 11 Kan. App. 2d 362, 368, 721 P.2d 743 (1986).
211. Cited; improper admission of telephone records under subsection (m) affecting defendant's credibility harmless where other basis for doubt existed. State v. Wilson, 11 Kan. App. 2d 504, 508, 511, 728 P.2d 1332 (1986).
212. Provisions of (dd) safeguard defendant's right to confront; failure to give appropriate instruction may be reversible error. State v. Clark, 11 Kan. App. 2d 586, 589, 591, 730 P.2d 1104 (1986).
213. Autopsy report of Colorado coroner admissible under subsection (o) as official record. State v. Bell, 239 Kan. 229, 233, 718 P.2d 628 (1986).
214. Trial court erred in permitting expert witnesses to tell jury child was telling truth and defendant had molested (dd). State v. Jackson, 239 Kan. 463, 470, 721 P.2d 232 (1986).
215. Cited; phrase "unavailable as a witness" examined; finding of unavailability within trial court's discretion. State v. Ransom, 239 Kan. 594, 598, 722 P.2d 540 (1986).
216. Key factor in section (a) is availability for examination and cross-examination; physical presence at time of hearsay testimony not required. State v. Hicks, 240 Kan. 302, 308, 309, 729 P.2d 1146 (1986).
217. Paragraph (dd) cited; statutes relative to recorded testimony of child victim (K.S.A. 22-3433, 22-3434) held constitutional. State v. Johnson, 240 Kan. 326, 329, 332, 729 P.2d 1169 (1986).
218. Cited; allowing preliminary hearing transcript of testimony into evidence examined where witness unavailable at trial. State v. Ruebke, 240 Kan. 493, 517, 731 P.2d 842 (1987).
219. Cited; sufficiency of admonition to disregard hearsay testimony examined. State v. Hollis, 240 Kan. 521, 535, 731 P.2d 260 (1987).
220. Nolo contendere plea or finding of guilty in criminal action cannot be used as evidence or admission in subsequent civil action. Patrons Mut. Ins. Ass'n v. Harmon, 240 Kan. 707, 711, 732 P.2d 741 (1987).
221. As used in subsection (c)(2), preliminary hearing and preliminary examination (K.S.A. 22-2902) are synonymous; testimony obtained at suppression hearing cannot be used at trial when witness unavailable to testify. State v. Phifer, 241 Kan. 233, 235, 237, 238, 239, 737 P.2d 1 (1987).
222. Newspaper article of purported statement by testifying witness not within any exceptions to hearsay rule. State v. Hunter, 241 Kan. 629, 637, 740 P.2d 559 (1987).
223. Cited; admissibility of defendant's inquisition statements at trial noted; admissibility of absent witness' statements examined. State v. Cathey, 241 Kan. 715, 726, 728, 741 P.2d 738 (1987).
224. Phrase "trial judge" (dd) defined, propriety of rulings examined. State v. Hutchcraft, 242 Kan. 55, 62, 744 P.2d 849 (1987).
225. Specific authority of K.S.A. 60-1615 regarding admissibility of home study reports overrides provisions herein. In re Marriage of Talkington, 13 Kan. App. 2d 89, 91, 92, 762 P.2d 843 (1988).
226. Cited; evidence obtained from computer-generated phone trap as admissible business records (m) examined. State v. Estill, 13 Kan. App. 2d 111, 112, 764 P.2d 455 (1988).
227. Cited; out-of-court statements, phrase "unavailable as a witness" in (dd), and factors relevant to determination of availability examined. State v. Kuone, 243 Kan. 218, 757 P.2d 289 (1988).
228. Cited; statements by plaintiff's decedent made nine days before death as not dying declarations examined. Wisker v. Hart, 244 Kan. 36, 42, 766 P.2d 168 (1988).
229. Cited; admissibility of hospital documents for impeachment purposes as business records under (m) examined. Stickney v. Wesley Med. Center, 244 Kan. 147, 150, 768 P.2d 253 (1989).
230. Where defendant waives right to confrontation for procuring absence of witness, right to hearsay objection to prior statement waived. State v. Gettings, 244 Kan. 236, 240, 769 P.2d 25 (1989).
231. Denial of admission of videotaped pretrial interviews of child-victim (K.S.A. 22-3433), use of videotaped testimony (K.S.A. 22-3434) examined. State v. Eaton, 244 Kan. 370, 382, 769 P.2d 1157 (1989).
232. Hearing, evidence and findings necessary to support admissibility of hearsay statements under (dd) examined. In re M.O., 13 Kan. App. 2d 381, 770 P.2d 856 (1989).
233. Rules for admission in evidence of declarations against interest restated and applied. State v. Jackson, 244 Kan. 621, 623, 624, 772 P.2d 747 (1989).
234. Right to confront child-victim witness, testimony via TV (K.S.A. 22-3434) examined. State v. Chisholm, 245 Kan. 145, 149, 777 P.2d 753 (1989).
235. Use of deposition (K.S.A. 60-232(a)) as exception to hearsay rule determined. Eferakeya v. Twin City State Bank, 245 Kan. 154, 160, 777 P.2d 759 (1989).
236. Policy of paragraph (m) is to rely on sound discretion of trial court to determine if evidence trustworthy. Hudson v. City of Shawnee, 245 Kan. 221, 230, 777 P.2d 800 (1989).
237. Circumstances when principal bound by statements of agent, when agent's statements admissible examined. Prairie State Bank v. Hoefgen, 245 Kan. 236, 242, 777 P.2d 811 (1989).
238. Admissibility of statements by unavailable codefendant to witness under paragraph (j) examined. State v. Jones, 246 Kan. 214, 218, 787 P.2d 726 (1990).
239. Introduction of traffic projections as business records permitted; sound discretion of trial court as to trustworthiness noted. Hudson v. City of Shawnee, 246 Kan. 395, 405, 406, 730 P.2d 933 (1990). (Modifying 245 Kan. 221, 777 P.2d 800 (1989)).
240. Exclusion of defendants' proffered evidence concerning annuity insurance contract covering future medical expenses examined. Gregory v. Carey, 246 Kan. 504, 507, 791 P.2d 1329 (1990).
241. Finding that child-victim was unavailable as a witness one year before trial as error determined. State v. McClanahan, 14 Kan. App. 2d 410, 413, 792 P.2d 355 (1990).
242. Distinction of subsection (dd) from K.S.A. 22-3433 and 22-3434 examined; application of statutes and Sixth Amendment under facts presented determined. State v. Lamb, 14 Kan. App. 2d 664, 667, 798 P.2d 506 (1990).
243. Use of testimony from other trial where defendant not present permissible where witnesses available for cross-examination in present case. State v. Osby, 246 Kan. 621, 631, 793 P.2d 243 (1990).
244. Exclusion as hearsay statement made to witness regarding vehicle at scene of crime examined. State v. Bailey, 247 Kan. 330, 339, 799 P.2d 977 (1990).
245. Admission of preliminary hearing testimony of witness unavailable at trial permitted where cross-examination opportunity existed at hearing. State v. Wesson, 247 Kan. 639, 649, 650, 802 P.2d 574 (1990).
246. Use of words "apparently reliable" do not violate confrontation clause; corroborating evidence not required. Myatt v. Hannigan, 910 F.2d 680 (1990).
247. Admission of statements by deceased victim demonstrating state of mind prior to being murdered held proper. State v. Mayberry, 248 Kan. 369, 384, 807 P.2d 86 (1991).
248. In considering admissibility, statute requires trial court to determine if source of information, method and time of preparation reflect trustworthiness. Diversified Financial Planners, Inc. v. Maderak, 248 Kan. 946, 950, 811 P.2d 1236 (1991).
249. Testimony regarding fear in the marketplace of high voltage electric lines examined with respect to value in condemnation proceeding. Ryan v. Kansas Power & Light Co., 249 Kan. 1, 10, 815 P.2d 528 (1991).
250. Computer printout admissible if qualified under hearsay rule exception; custodian of records not necessary for laying foundation for admission. State v. Brown, 15 Kan. App. 2d 465, 467, 809 P.2d 559 (1991).
251. "Unavailable as a witness" used in (dd) for child victim cases examined. State v. Bratt, 250 Kan. 264, 265, 268, 269, 272, 273, 824 P.2d 983 (1992).
252. Admissibility of out-of-court statement that is not hearsay. State v. Getz, 250 Kan. 560, 567, 830 P.2d 5 (1992).
253. Defendant's statements made during psychiatric examination not hearsay where statements used to establish basis for expert opinion. State v. Humphrey, 252 Kan. 6, 14, 845 P.2d 592 (1992).
254. Trial court's determination that because of relationship between defendant and witnesses, their testimony would be hearsay examined. State v. Larry, 252 Kan. 92, 97, 843 P.2d 196 (1992).
255. Hearsay nature of certain conversations, statements, and reports of deceased confidential informant examined. State v. Rowe, 252 Kan. 243, 843 P.2d 714 (1992).
256. Testimony of erroneously excluded evidence admitted through direct testimony of defendant's attorney amounted to harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Josenberger, 17 Kan. App. 2d 167, 176, 836 P.2d 11 (1992).
257. Admissibility of statement under subsection (l) as to state of mind regarding intent examined. Laterra v. Treaster, 17 Kan. App. 2d 714, 719, 720, 844 P.2d 724 (1992).
258. Considered in determining authority of hearing panel of Board for Discipline of Attorneys, in disciplinary proceedings. In re Carson, 252 Kan. 399, 408, 845 P.2d 47 (1993).
259. No error in excluding circumstantial evidence that someone other than defendant committed crime when state's case is based on direct evidence. State v. Thomas, 252 Kan. 564, 572, 847 P.2d 1219 (1993).
260. Conviction of theft by deception; hearsay statements in deposition testimony admitted hereunder; coconspirator unavailable as witness under invocation of privilege against self-incrimination. State v. Schultz, 252 Kan. 819, 842, 850 P.2d 818 (1993).
261. Subsection (dd) applies to proceedings to terminate parental rights. In re D.V., 17 Kan. App. 2d 788, 789, 790, 791, 792, 844 P.2d 752 (1993).
262. Admission of testimony that defendant had on previous occasions physically abused victim examined. State v. Young, 253 Kan. 28, 35, 852 P.2d 510 (1993).
263. Nature of out-of-court statement by third party to police officer examined. State v. Johnson, 253 Kan. 75, 88, 853 P.2d 34 (1993).
264. Expert testimony held improper in allowing jury to infer guilt because "Behavioral Triggers" of child abuse present. State v. Cheeks, 253 Kan. 93, 102, 853 P.2d 655 (1993).
265. Nature of advertising brochure and correspondence relative thereto found in a box in basement of manufacturer's office examined. Hurlbut v. Conoco, Inc., 253 Kan. 515, 530, 856 P.2d 1313 (1993).
266. Admissibility of statements by deceased witness through res gestae exception examined. State v. Toney, 253 Kan. 651, 658, 659, 862 P.2d 350 (1993).
267. Admissibility of nonverbal conduct by prosecution after defendant elicits unfavorable testimony during cross-examination examined. State v. Wacker, 253 Kan. 664, 671, 672, 861 P.2d 1272 (1993).
268. Extent of reasonable diligence in attempting to locate absent witness examined. State v. Mitchell, 18 Kan. App. 2d 530, 532, 855 P.2d 989 (1993).
269. Whether unavailability of declarant must be shown before declarant's hearsay statement may be considered for admission examined. State v. Willey, 18 Kan. App. 2d 837, 860 P.2d 67 (1993).
270. Whether counsel's failure to obtain admission of codefendant's confession rendered assistance of counsel ineffective examined. Haislip v. Attorney General, State of Kan., 992 F.2d 1085, 1087 (1993).
271. Whether court's disallowing witness testimony regarding unavailable witness' alleged hearsay statements was error examined; whether witness' statement implicating defendant was a confession or admission against interest hearsay exception examined. State v. Green, 254 Kan. 669, 681, 682, 867 P.2d 366 (1994).
272. Whether trial court's abuse of discretion in failure to find witness unavailable was harmless error examined. State v. Mack, 255 Kan. 21, 34, 871 P.2d 1265 (1994).
273. Whether decedent's statements before death implicating defendant were admissible under contemporaneous statement hearsay exception examined. State v. Johnson, 255 Kan. 140, 151, 871 P.2d 1246 (1994).
274. Whether defense lack of diligence in attempting to locate witness precluded admission of taped statement examined. State v. Johnson, 255 Kan. 252, 254, 874 P.2d 623 (1994).
275. Whether admission of murder victim's statements as part of res gestae proper examined. State v. Peckham, 255 Kan. 310, 326, 875 P.2d 257 (1994).
276. Whether admission of unavailable witness hearsay testimony was error because of incentive to falsify statement examined. State v. Stafford, 255 Kan. 807, 809, 812, 878 P.2d 820 (1994).
277. Whether admission of available witness' hearsay testimony which violated defendant's right of confrontation was harmless error examined. State v. Johnson-Howell, 255 Kan. 928, 935, 943, 950, 881 P.2d 1288 (1994).
278. Whether court erred by admitting statements of witness made contemporaneously with crime examined. State v. Richardson, 256 Kan. 69, 88, 883 P.2d 1107 (1994).
279. Whether murder victim's statements are admissible as res gestae examined. State v. Gadelkarim, 256 Kan. 671, 687, 887 P.2d 88 (1994).
280. Whether autistic child witness out-of-court facilitated communication testimony is admissible under child hearsay rule examined. State v. Warden, 257 Kan. 94, 106, 119, 891 P.2d 1074 (1994).
281. Whether oral testimony regarding certification of breathalyzer and operator without documentation is hearsay examined. State v. Rohr, 19 Kan. App. 2d 869, 872, 879 P.2d 221 (1994).
282. Whether business records containing expert opinions are admissible under KCCC (K.S.A. 38-1501 et seq.) where expert is unavailable for cross-examination examined. In re N.D.G., 20 Kan. App. 2d 17, 24, 883 P.2d 89 (1994).
283. Whether testator's statements admitted to prove lack of intent to revoke will are inadmissible hearsay examined. In re Estate of Kasper, 20 Kan. App. 2d 309, 318, 887 P.2d 702 (1994).
284. Whether prosecution laid adequate foundation for admitting affidavits relating to probation violation in revocation hearing examined. State v. Miller, 20 Kan. App. 2d 378, 391, 869 P.2d 766 (1995).
285. Whether court erred by allowing hearsay that incriminated defendant while denying hearsay from same declaration that exonerated defendant examined. State v. Brickhouse, 20 Kan. App. 2d 495, 500, 890 P.2d 353 (1995).
286. Whether defendant's prearrest statement he was intoxicated was admissible as declaration against interest hearsay exception examined. State v. Cooper, 20 Kan. App. 2d 759, 760, 892 P.2d 909 (1995).
287. Admission of deceased victim's statements regarding state of mind prior to being murdered upheld. State v. Anthony, 257 Kan. 1003, 1021, 898 P.2d 1109 (1995).
288. Evidence of statements implicating defendant admissible under co-conspirator hearsay exception; factual basis for conspiracy established. State v. Swafford, 257 Kan. 1023, 1039, 897 P.2d 1027 (1995).
289. Trial court's binding over defendant based on hearsay evidence at preliminary hearing held harmless error. State v. Butler, 257 Kan. 1043, 1060, 897 P.2d 1007 (1995).
290. No violation of right to confrontation where testimony of unavailable witness read into evidence. State v. Humphrey, 258 Kan. 351, 370, 905 P.2d 664 (1995).
291. Erroneous exclusion of admissible statements against witness penal interest held harmless error. State v. Brown, 258 Kan. 374, 381, 904 P.2d 985 (1995).
292. Trial court properly admitted victim's out-of-court statements regarding defendant's sexual advances as contemporaneous utterance. State v. Sanders, 258 Kan. 409, 419, 904 P.2d 951 (1995).
293. Evidence admissible after defense counsel opened the door to otherwise inadmissible hearsay; evidence inadmissible under subsection (j). State v. Johnson, 258 Kan. 475, 905 P.2d 94 (1995).
294. Business records hearsay exception does not apply to oral testimony; proper hearsay objection not cured by applying res gestae label. State v. Cox, 258 Kan. 557, 571, 908 P.2d 603 (1995).
295. Authentication requirements for in-state and out-of-state court documents for use in establishing criminal history discussed. State v. Strickland, 21 Kan. App. 2d 12, 14, 900 P.2d 854 (1995).
296. Trial court's use of witness testimony from preliminary hearing upheld where witness found unavailable. State v. Cook, 259 Kan. 370, 375, 377, 383, 913 P.2d 97 (1996).
297. Erroneous admission of hearsay evidence to prove premeditation constituted harmless error. State v. Harris, 259 Kan. 689, 698, 701, 915 P.2d 758 (1996).
298. Affidavit admissible as evidence of probable cause of reasonable belief that medical malpractice claim valid. Miskew v. Hess, 21 Kan. App. 2d 927, 935, 910 P.2d 223 (1996).
299. Testimony by expert based partially on defendant's statements in psychiatric evaluation held not hearsay. State v. Kaiser, 260 Kan. 235, 258, 918 P.2d 629 (1996).
300. Trial court did not err in admitting evidence of 911 call or statements made by defendant to police. State v. Kaesontae, 260 Kan. 386, 392, 920 P.2d 959 (1996).
301. No error in admission of unavailable witness' preliminary hearing testimony; finding of unavailability of witness affirmed. State v. Vargas, 260 Kan. 791, 796, 926 P.2d 223 (1996).
302. Evidence sufficient to support trial court ruling that defendant's confession was voluntary. State v. Banks, 260 Kan. 918, 922, 927 P.2d 456 (1996).
303. Promise of benefits by investigators to accused during interrogation rendered confession involuntary and inadmissible. State v. Baston, 261 Kan. 100, 106, 928 P.2d 79 (1996).
304. Statement of witness' wife observing defendant threaten witness with firearm admissible under both subsection (a) and res gestae theory. State v. Torrance, 22 Kan. App. 2d 721, 724, 725, 922 P.2d 1109 (1996).
305. Testimony of rebuttal witness who contradicted testimony of another state rebuttal witness admissible. State v. Rice, 261 Kan. 567, 580, 932 P.2d 981 (1997).
306. Trial court did not err by admitting defendant's confession without holding a voluntariness hearing. State v. Bornholdt, 261 Kan. 644, 651, 932 P.2d 964 (1997).
307. Evidence of admissible hearsay may be discredited with prior inconsistent statement without giving declarant opportunity to explain. Thoren v. Lawrence Memorial Hospital, 23 Kan. App. 2d 328, 333, 929 P.2d 815 (1997).
308. At resentencing, state may present proper authenticating documents of defendant's criminal history. State v. Strickland, 23 Kan. App. 2d 615, 618, 933 P.2d 782 (1997).
309. Videotape statements of police officer unavailable at trial not inadmissible hearsay or hearsay at all; not offered to prove statement's truth. State v. Ninci, 262 Kan. 21, 50, 936 P.2d 1364 (1997).
310. Admissibility of criminal confession as exception to hearsay rule under subsection (f) examined. State v. Lane, 262 Kan. 373, 384, 940 P.2d 422 (1997).
311. Officer's testimony concerning his intoxilyzer certification could not substitute for statutorily required certification document. State v. Muck, 262 Kan. 459, 464, 939 P.2d 896 (1997).
312. Trial court admission of preliminary hearing testimony of unavailable witness previously subject to cross-examination upheld. State v. Zamora, 263 Kan. 340, 343, 949 P.2d 621 (1997).
313. Admission of hearsay evidence constituted harmless error. State v. Clark, 263 Kan. 370, 376, 949 P.2d 1099 (1997).
314. Erroneous admission of hearsay evidence in attorney disciplinary proceeding did not violate respondent's due process rights. In re Seck, 263 Kan. 482, 489, 949 P.2d 1122 (1997).
315. Unavailable witnesses hearsay statements contained particularized guarantee of trustworthiness for confrontation clause purposes. State v. Bailey, 263 Kan. 685, 692, 952 P.2d 1289 (1998).
316. Failure to admit witness hearsay statement based on lack of foundation not an abuse of discretion. State v. Gardner, 264 Kan. 95, 108, 955 P.2d 1199 (1998).
317. Statement made concerning cause of injuries by victim properly admitted as excited utterances. State v. Todd, 24 Kan. App. 2d 796, 799, 954 P.2d 1 (1998).
318. Defendant may introduce exculpatory portion of defendant's statements introduced by prosecution without testifying and regardless of hearsay rule. State v. Hills, 264 Kan. 437, 448, 957 P.2d 436 (1998).
319. Trial court ruling that state laid an adequate foundation for admitting breath test evidence upheld. State v. Bishop, 264 Kan. 717, 727, 957 P.2d 369 (1998).
320. Admission of statements of witness not called at trial under coconspirator exception to hearsay rule affirmed. State v. Speed, 265 Kan. 26, 41, 961 P.2d 13 (1998).
321. Contemporaneous objection to hearsay evidence at introduction thereof required to preserve issue for appeal notwithstanding prior unfavorable ruling. State v. Carr, 265 Kan. 608, 619, 963 P.2d 421 (1998).
322. Out of court utterance offered for establishing what was said did not constitute hearsay or violate defendant's right to confront witness. State v. Vontress, 266 Kan. 248, 253, 970 P.2d 42 (1998).
323. Appellants failed to provide sufficient record to review claim witness should have been cross-examined concerning expert opinions. Floyd v. General Motors Corp., 25 Kan. App. 2d 71, 76, 960 P.2d 763 (1998).
324. Section governs when K.S.A. 22-3433 and this section are both applicable to witness testimony. State v. Correll, 25 Kan. App. 2d 770, 773, 973 P.2d 197 (1998).
325. TIPS hot line telephone call appropriately excluded as impermissible hearsay evidence. State v. Humphery, 267 Kan. 45, 53, 978 P.2d 264 (1999).
326. Testimony of former cell mate at first trial admitted at second trial; reasonable diligence by state in attempting to locate witness. State v. McCray, 267 Kan. 339, 353, 979 P.2d 134 (1999).
327. No error in admitting hearsay statement of deceased murder victim which was recently perceived, with clear recollection and no incentive to falsify. State v. Love, 267 Kan. 600, 609, 986 P.2d 358 (1999).
328. Pretrial statement to party at scene of crime properly admitted as hearsay exception. State v. Williams, 268 Kan. 1, 11, 988 P.2d 722 (1999).
329. Trial court did not abuse discretion by admitting facsimile of a nonparty's business records after foundation laid. State v. Smith, 268 Kan. 222, 237, 993 P.2d 1213 (1999).
330. Medical journals and articles are admissible as independent substantive evidence provided relevancy and reliability are established. Wilson v. Knight, 26 Kan. App. 2d 226, 230, 982 P.2d 400 (1999).
331. Tape recorded statement of key witness not admissible under subsection (a), previous statement of a person present, or (j), declaration against interest. State v. Garza, 26 Kan. App. 2d 426, 433, 434, 991 P.2d 905 (1999).
332. Alleged violation of defendant's right to confront witness through admission of hearsay statements held harmless error. Stucky v. Koerner, 71 F. Supp. 2d 1093, 1094, 1097 (1999).
333. Testimony at preliminary hearing may be used at case in chief if witness unavailable at time of trial. State v. Harris, 27 Kan. App. 2d 41, 998 P.2d 524 (2000).
334. Subsection (f) requires a voluntariness analysis, not a trustworthiness analysis. State v. Maybin, 27 Kan. App. 2d 189, 2 P.3d 179 (2000).
335. Statement of victim to police officer admitted as "excited utterance" exception to hearsay rule. State v. Giles, 27 Kan. App. 2d 340, 4 P.3d 630 (2000).
336. Requirements to admit victim's prior statement to police under subsection (d)(3) discussed; not a firmly rooted hearsay exception. State v. Rodriguez-Garcia, 27 Kan. App. 2d 439, 8 P.3d 3 (2000).
337. Policeman's testimony of absent witness allowed as contemporaneous statement hearsay exception. City of Colby v. Cranston, 27 Kan. App. 2d 530, 7 P.3d 300 (2000).
338. Trial court's suppression of search based on third party testimony offered to prove truth of matter asserted is reversed; officer had apparent authority to search house based on consent from 17 year old resident. State v. Savage, 27 Kan. App. 2d 1022, 10 P.3d 765 (2000).
339. Statement of "Why did you kill those guys?" properly admitted as excited utterance, not res gestae. State v. Bryant, 272 Kan. 1204, 38 P.3d 661 (2002).
340. Excited utterance exception held applicable where witness stated defendant told third party victim had been killed by a shot to back of head. State v. Boldridge, 274 Kan. 795, 57 P.3d 8 (2002).
341. No error in admitting defendant's confession to police. State v. Makthepharak, 276 Kan. 563, 78 P.3d 412 (2003).
342. Failure to admit statement against interest plus other errors require reversal of convictions. State v. Meinert, 31 Kan. App. 2d 492, 67 P.3d 850 (2003).
343. Trial court holding that alleged aggravated sodomy victim was unavailable to testify was reasonable. Juarez v. Nelson, 276 F. Supp. 2d 1159, 1166 (2003).
344. Defendant forfeits right to confront witness and waives right to hearsay objection upon showing defendant procured absent of witness (witness shot and killed). State v. Meeks, 277 Kan. 609, 88 P.3d 789 (2004).
345. Prior testimony properly admitted; witness had selective memory loss; prior inconsistent statements could be used to question credibility. State v. Carter, 278 Kan. 74, 91 P.3d 1162 (2004).
346. Trial court correctly determined statements of two-year old victim were unreliable and inadmissible hearsay. State v. Mercer, 33 Kan. App. 2d 308, 101 P.3d 732 (2004).
347. Statute could not provide basis for admission of co-conspirator's statements made after complete execution of crime. State v. Nguyen, 281 Kan. 702, 716, 133 P.3d 1259 (2006).
348. Defendant's failure to authenticate California records precluded records from being qualified for admission under the "Content of official record" exception to the hearsay rule. State v. Gonzalez, 282 Kan. 73, 86, 145 P.3d 18 (2006).
349. As used in subsection (d), "the matter" refers to the subject of the contested statement. State v. Garcia, 282 Kan. 252, 267, 144 P.3d 684 (2006).
350. Spontaneous response to telephone call with immediate circumstances was inherently trustworthy; did not violate defendant's 6 th amendment confrontation rights. State v. Davis, 282 Kan. 666, 677, 148 P.3d 510 (2006).
351. Testimony regarding statements made by co-conspirator while attempt to hide conspiracy ongoing fall within hearsay exception. State v. Moody, 35 Kan. App. 2d 547, 560, 132 P.3d 985 (2006).
352. Hearsay testimony admissible under subsection (a) in child in need of care proceeding where declarant available for cross-examination. In re J.D.C. 35 Kan. App. 2d 908, 915, 136 P.3d 950 (2006).
353. The transcript of a defendant's interview with police is admissible under subsection (g). State v. Horton, 283 Kan. 44, 63, 151 P.3d 9 (2007).
354. Statement admitted under (d)(3) did not violate defendant's confrontation rights under the U.S. Constitution's 6 th Amendment. State v. Davis, 283 Kan. 569, 576, 158 P.3d 317 (2007).
355. Written appraisal attributable to plaintiffs, submitted to the court, admissible under subsection (g). Mooney v. City of Overland Park, 283 Kan. 617, 623, 153 P.3d 1252 (2007).
356. Statement made by defendant offered to prove defendant's state of mind; admissible. State v. McKissack, 283 Kan. 721, 738, 156 P.3d 1249 (2007).
357. Hearsay exception of admitting preliminary hearing testimony discussed and applied; inculpatory statements were admissible as party admissions under rules of evidence. State v. Stano, 284 Kan. 126, 132, 142, 159 P.3d 931 (2007).
358. Section permits hearsay evidence by person who is present at hearing and available for cross examination. In re J.D.C., 284 Kan. 155, 162, 163, 170, 159 P.3d 974 (2007).
359. Subsection (dd) discussed in case where child did not testify as witness in criminal trial. State v. Noah, 284 Kan. 608, 610, 162 P.3d 799 (2007).
360. Hearsay testimony admitted properly; witness was subject to being recalled by either party. State v. Miller, 284 Kan. 682, 709, 711, 713, 163 P.3d 267 (2007).
361. Cited in discussion of admissibility of hearsay, double hearsay and excited utterance. State v. Brown, 285 Kan. 261, 279, 173 P.3d 612 (2007).
362. Out-of-court statements inadmissible under K.S.A. 60-460 if declarant never testified at trial. State v. Birth, 37 Kan. App. 2d 753, 760, 761, 158 P.3d 345 (2007).
363. Exception to hearsay rule discussed involving declarant unavailable for trial. State v. Murray, 285 Kan. 503, 531, 532, 534, 535, 174 P.3d 407 (2008).
364. Cited; prosecutor's statements from prior trial qualified as admission of party opponent under K.S.A. 60-460(g). State v. Scott, 286 Kan. 54, 86, 183 P.3d 801 (2008).
365. Cited in case alleging prosecutor misconduct relating to witness credibility, no error found. State v. Scaife, 286 Kan. 614, 624, 186 P.3d 755 (2008).
366. Cited; district court did not abuse discretion in admitting testimony to jailhouse cellmates; confession was declaration against interest. State v. Hughes, 286 Kan. 1010, 1018-1020, 1032, 1033, 191 P.3d 268 (2008).
367. Cited; dying declaration held properly admitted; no confrontation clause violation. State v. Jones, 287 Kan. 559, 563, 564, 197 P.3d 815 (2008).
368. Cited in case granting summary judgment for defendants in medical malpractice claim. Stormont-Vail Healthcare, Inc. v. Cutrer, 39 Kan. App. 2d 1, 5, 178 P.3d 35 (2008).
369. Mentioned; police dispatch description of suspect from anonymous caller not offered to prove truth of matter, not hearsay. State v. Barney, 39 Kan. App. 2d 540, 545, 185 P.3d 277 (2008).
370. Testimony held not in error; statement admitted under the hearsay exception for adoptive admissions of K.S.A. 60-460(h)(2). State v. Ransom, 288 Kan. 697, 207 P.3d 208 (2009).
371. Court discusses promises of leniency; statements deemed freely and voluntarily given. State v. Sharp, 289 Kan. 72, 210 P.3d 590 (2009).
372. Under case facts, respondent's stipulation dispensed with usual prerequisite of admission or records relied upon by expert. In re Care & Treatment of Colt, 289 Kan. 234, 211 P.3d 797 (2009).
373. Due process not violated for sentence based, in part, on information in arrest report affidavit. State v. Easterling, 289 Kan. 470, 213 P.3d 418 (2009).
374. District court erroneously excluded evidence of defendant's counsel's legal advice; evidence not hearsay. Boldridge v. State, 289 Kan. 618, 215 P.3d 585 (2009).
375. Evidence of person's reputation in the community is admissible to prove the truth of the person's reputation. State v. Penn, 41 Kan. App. 2d 251, 201 P.3d 752 (2009).
376. Defendant's confrontation rights violated by admission of victim's statements to sexual assault nurse; harmless error. State v. Miller, 42 Kan. App. 2d 12, 208 P.3d 774 (2009).
377. District court erred in admitting the hearsay statements into evidence; declarant's mere presence at the hearing insufficient. State v. Kelley, 42 Kan. App. 2d 782, 217 P.3d 56 (2009).
378. Admission of defendant's involuntary confession to detective required reversal of conviction and new trial at which confession was inadmissible. State v. Stone, 291 Kan. 13, 237 P.3d 1229 (2010).
379. Statements made in the course of criminal activity, not in the course of the subsequent investigation, held not hearsay. State v. Becker, 290 Kan. 842, 235 P.3d 424 (2010).
380. State of mind hearsay exception not applicable under facts of the case. Eggeson v. DeLuca, 45 Kan. App. 2d 435, 252 P.3d 128 (2011).
381. Testimony of defendant's former wife concerning non-testifying child victim's allegations against defendant was admissible nonhearsay, as testimony was offered not to prove the truth of the matter asserted. State v. Race, 293 Kan. 69, 259 P.3d 707 (2011).
382. In prosecution for murder in the first degree, non-testifying defendant's question to police detective as to whether detective found a gun on the victim was inadmissible hearsay. State v. Cosby, 293 Kan. 121, 262 P.3d 285 (2011).
383. Statements made by a murder victim to her friends about her relationship with the defendant are admissible. State v. Robinson, 293 Kan. 1002, 270 P.3d 1183 (2012).
384. Exception to hearsay rule applies to statements made by a deceased victim to his wife regarding his plans for the evening. State v. Summers, 293 Kan. 819, 272 P.3d 1 (2012).
385. Text message statements that can be neither true nor false are not hearsay. State v. James, 48 Kan. App. 2d 310, 288 P.3d 504 (2012).
386. Statements made by co-defendant brother could be admitted as declarations against interest. State v. Carr, 300 Kan. 1, 207, 331 P.3d 544 (2014).
387. Handwritten notes qualified as prior statement hearsay exception. State v. Reed, 300 Kan. 494, 503, 332 P.3d 172 (2014).
388. Declarant's out-of-court statements were not excluded from the definition of hearsay as previous statements of persons present because he was protected by his right against self-incrimination and later refused to testify, but the statements were excluded from the definition of hearsay as vicarious admissions of a co-conspirator. State v. Logsdon, 304 Kan. 3, 32-35, 371 P.3d 836 (2016).
389. Provisions of the business records exception to the hearsay rule do not shift the state's burden of proof to the defendant in a criminal prosecution in violation of the due process clause, but merely changes the manner of the state's proof. State v. Cleverley, 53 Kan. App. 2d 491, 390 P.3d 75 (2017).
390. Statement unaccompanied by any contextual evidence failed the requirements for admitting a statement under the excited utterance exception to the hearsay rule. State v. Mattox, 305 Kan. 1015, 1033-35, 390 P.3d 514 (2017).
391. District court did not err by admitting cell phone records maintained in the regular course of business of cell phone provider and compiled into document by employee of business. State v. Carr, 54 Kan. App. 2d 780, 797, 406 P.3d 403 (2017).
392. A court's admission of testimony concerning a missing methamphetamine pipe as a motive for murder was not an abuse of discretion. State v. Lemmie, 311 Kan. 439, 454, 462 P.3d 161 (2020).
393. Statements were not excluded as hearsay where the statements sought to give rise to an indirect inference and were not an assertion to prove the matter asserted. State v. Randle, 311 Kan. 468, 462 P.3d 624 (2020).
394. When the record contains no evidence of a motive to mislead by an interpreter or other evidence questioning an interpreter's neutrality and the declarant testifies at trial, evidence of a neutral third party's interpreted statements is attributed to the declarant without an additional layer of hearsay under the language conduit rule. State v. Gutierrez-Fuentes, 59 Kan. App. 2d 70, 81, 477 P.3d 1041 (2020).
395. District court did not err by admitting testimony of expert who moved to New Zealand prior to trial as deposition testimony falls under the hearsay exception in (c)(1). State v. Showalter, 318 Kan. 338, 356, 543 P.3d 508 (2024).