KANSAS OFFICE of
  REVISOR of STATUTES

  

Home >> Statutes >> Back


Click to open printable format in new window.Printable Format
 | Next

65-4152.

History: L. 1981, ch. 140, § 3; L. 1996, ch. 257, § 3; L. 1999, ch. 170, § 4; L. 2002, ch. 155, § 3; L. 2005, ch. 153, § 5; L. 2007, ch. 169, § 8; Repealed, L. 2009, ch. 32, § 64; July 1.

CASE ANNOTATIONS

1. Trial court did not err in refusing to suppress evidence seized by search warrant based on unverified reports coupled with personal observation. State v. Walter, 234 Kan. 78, 79, 670 P.2d 1354 (1983).

2. Conviction hereunder; speedy trial, search and seizure discussed. State v. Huber, 10 Kan. App. 2d 560, 561, 704 P.2d 1004 (1985).

3. Conviction reversed; search warrant based on warrantless searches, expectation of privacy, curtilage of home, plain view doctrine examined. State v. Waldschmidt, 12 Kan. App. 2d 284, 285, 740 P.2d 617 (1987).

4. Cited; information charging possession of drug paraphernalia as not requiring allegation of purpose for possession examined. State v. McMannis, 12 Kan. App. 2d 464, 467, 747 P.2d 1343 (1987).

5. Conviction affirmed; criteria to consider in sentencing (K.S.A. 21-4606), specific findings required before imposing fine examined. State v. McGlothlin, 242 Kan. 437, 747 P.2d 1335 (1988).

6. Cited; search and seizure with warrant based on observations of state park custodian; private citizen not agent of state examined. State v. Smith, 243 Kan. 715, 717, 763 P.2d 632 (1988).

7. Propriety of searches and seizures, excessive sentencing examined. State v. Doile, 244 Kan. 493, 769 P.2d 666 (1989).

8. "Totality of the circumstances" indicating adequacy of affidavit submitted in support of search warrant examined. State v. Toler, 246 Kan. 269, 787 P.2d 711 (1990).

9. Unlawful arrest as not giving immunity from prosecution nor defense to conviction, admissibility of statements after arrest examined. State v. Weis, 246 Kan. 694, 695, 792 P.2d 989 (1990).

10. Cited in opinion holding that Kansas drug tax act (K.S.A. 79-5201 et seq.) does not violate due process provisions of U.S. Constitution. State v. Berberich, 248 Kan. 854, 811 P.2d 1192 (1991).

11. Lack of probable cause in stopping vehicle and suppression of evidence seized from illegal stop and frisk noted. State v. McKeown, 249 Kan. 506, 819 P.2d 644 (1991).

12. Guidelines for determining reasonableness of impounding a vehicle examined. State v. Teeter, 249 Kan. 548, 550, 819 P.2d 651 (1991).

13. Necessity of making specific findings pursuant to K.S.A. 21-4607(2) and (3) before imposing a fine, prospective application of K.S.A. 21-4603(3) examined. State v. McNett, 15 Kan. App. 2d 291, 292, 807 P.2d 171 (1991).

14. Search warrant directed against multiple occupancy structure invalid if description of unit insufficient; exception where affidavit contains description and affiant is officer executing warrant. State v. Dye, 250 Kan. 287, 288, 826 P.2d 500 (1992).

15. Possession of cocaine and possession of drug paraphernalia are not multiplicitous charges. State v. Hill, 16 Kan. App. 2d 280, 281, 282, 283, 284, 285, 823 P.2d 201 (1992).

16. Conviction affirmed; circumstances when failure of court to give cautionary instruction on testimony of paid informant not reversible error examined. State v. Novotny, 252 Kan. 753, 851 P.2d 365 (1993).

17. Whether detection of marijuana odor standing alone provides probable cause for vehicle search following checklane stop examined. State v. MacDonald, 253 Kan. 320, 856 P.2d 116 (1993).

18. Where identical offenses are involved, defendant can only be sentenced under the lesser penalty. State v. Campbell, 278 Kan. 410, 101 P.3d 1179 (2004).

19. Where offenses have identical elements but are classified differently for punishment, defendant convicted of either may be sentenced only under lesser penalty. State v. Campbell, 279 Kan. 1, 106 P.3d 1129 (2005).

20. Offenses were overlapping rather than identical; following State v. Campbell, 279 Kan. 1, 106 P.3d 1129 (2005), defendant should be sentenced under lesser penalty of K.S.A. 65-4152. State v. Cherry, 279 Kan. 535, 112 P.3d 224 (2005).

21. Not multiplicitous of K.S.A. 65-4159, no double jeopardy violation found. State v. Schoonover, 281 Kan. 453, 500, 501, 504, 133 P.3d 48 (2006).

22. Not identical to the crime of attempted manufacture of methamphetamine. State v. Fanning, 281 Kan. 1176, 1184, 135 P.3d 1067 (2006).

23. Conviction hereunder; law regarding police-citizen encounters discussed and applied to fourth amendment search and seizure issues. State v. Thompson, 284 Kan. 763, 166 P.3d 1015 (2007).

24. Conviction of conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine classified as drug severity level 1. State v. Malm, 37 Kan. App. 2d 532, 534, 551, 552, 154 P.3d 1154 (2007).

25. Criminal convictions hereunder; court discusses grounds to uphold warrantless searches. State v. Geraghty, 38 Kan. App. 2d 114, 117, 163 P.3d 350 (2007).

26. Conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine and possession of drug paraphernalia not identical crimes; conspiracy requires "an agreement." State v. Denny, 38 Kan. App. 2d 724, 726, 730, 172 P.3d 57 (2007).

27. Conviction hereunder upheld. State v. Spangler, 38 Kan. App. 2d 817, 818, 833, 835 to 839, 173 P.3d 656 (2008).

28. Manufacturing methamphetamine under K.S.A. 65-4159 is not identical to K.S.A. 65-4152, using drug paraphernalia. State v. Cooper, 285 Kan. 964, 965 to 967, 179 P.3d 439 (2008).

29. Cited; in discussion of McAdam case and the three exceptions for timely appeal of criminal cases. State v. Patton, 287 Kan. 200, 206, 195 P.3d 753 (2008).

30. Cited; criminal elements under K.S.A. 65-4159(a) not identical to elements under K.S.A. 65-4152(a)(3). State v. Thompson, 287 Kan. 238, 253, 256, 259, 261, 200 P.3d 22 (2008).

31. Cited; court discusses and applies the identical offense doctrine to K.S.A. 65-4152 and 65-4159. State v. Moore, 39 Kan. App. 2d 568, 588, 589, 591, 181 P.3d 1258 (2008).

32. Cited in case discussing multiplicity conviction determinations and identical offense rule. State v. Pritchard, 39 Kan. App. 2d 746, 753, 755, 756, 184 P.3d 951 (2008).

33. Defendant who fails to participate in ordered drug abuse treatment program is subject to serve underlying prison sentence. State v. Bee, 288 Kan. 733, 207 P.3d 244 (2009).

34. BIDS application fee procedures protect a defendant's constitutional right to counsel. State v. Casady, 289 Kan. 150, 210 P.3d 113 (2009).

35. Constructive possession principles discussed and applied; no probable cause found. State v. Beaver, 41 Kan. App. 2d 124, 200 P.3d 490 (2009).

36. Search of vehicle upheld; case law on vehicle searches discussed and applied. State v. Davison, 41 Kan. App. 2d 140, 202 P.3d 44 (2009).

37. Probable cause for search found in case involving drug charges, based upon smell and plain view of paraphernalia. State v. Ulrey, 41 Kan. App. 2d 1052, 208 P.3d 317 (2009).

38. K.S.A. 65-4152(a)(2) is not a lesser degree of K.S.A. 65-4152(a)(3). State v. Dean, 42 Kan. App. 2d 32, 208 P.3d 343 (2009).

39. Crimes of possession of marijuana and possession of drug paraphernalia are not multiplicitous. State v. Ralston, 43 Kan. App. 2d 353, 225 P.3d 741 (2010).


 | Next

LEGISLATIVE COORDINATING COUNCIL
  12/18/2023 Meeting Notice Agenda
  LCC Policies

REVISOR OF STATUTES
  2023 New, Amended and Repealed by KSA
  2023 New, Amended and Repealed by Bill
  2024 Valid Section Numbers
  Chapter 72 Statute Transfer List
  Kansas School Equity & Enhancement Act
  Gannon v. State
  Information for Special Session 2021
  General Info., Legal Analysis & Research
  2022 Amended & Repealed Statutes
  2021 Amended & Repealed Statutes
  2020 Amended & repealed Statutes
  2019 Amended & Repealed Statutes

USEFUL LINKS
Session Laws

OTHER LEGISLATIVE SITES
Kansas Legislature
Administrative Services
Division of Post Audit
Research Department