Home >> Statutes >> Back

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

22-3102. Privilege against self-incrimination; grants of immunity. (a) No person called as a witness at an inquisition shall be required to make any statement which will incriminate such person.

(b) The county or district attorney, or the attorney general, may at any time, on behalf of the state, grant in writing to any person:

(1) Transactional immunity. Any person granted transactional immunity shall not be prosecuted for any crime which has been committed for which such immunity is granted or for any other transactions arising out of the same incident.

(2) Use and derivative immunity. Any person granted use and derivative use immunity may be prosecuted for any crime, but the state shall not use any testimony against such person provided under a grant of such immunity or any evidence derived from such testimony. Any defendant may file with the court a motion to suppress in writing to prevent the state from using evidence on the grounds that the evidence was derived from and obtained against the defendant as a result of testimony or statements made under such grant of immunity. The motion shall state facts supporting the allegations. Upon a hearing on such motion, the state shall have the burden to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the evidence was obtained independently and from a collateral source.

(c) Any person granted immunity under either or both subsections (b)(1) or (2) may not refuse to testify on grounds that such testimony may self incriminate unless such testimony may form the basis for a violation of federal law for which immunity under federal law has not been conferred. No person shall be compelled to testify in any proceeding where the person is a defendant.

(d) No immunity shall be granted for perjury as provided in K.S.A. 21-5903, and amendments thereto, which was committed in giving such evidence.

History: L. 1970, ch. 129, § 22-3102; L. 1999, ch. 56, § 2; L. 2011, ch. 30, § 124; July 1.

Source or Prior Law:


Law Review and Bar Journal References:

Survey of Recent Cases, 45 K.L.R. 1385 (1997).


1. Section cited as policy in giving immunity to district attorney. Sampson v. Rumsey, 1 Kan. App. 2d 191, 197, 563 P.2d 506.

2. Section cited; after hearing, court found 5 th Amendment privilege not available. State v. McQueen & Hardyway, 224 Kan. 420, 428, 582 P.2d 251.

3. Mentioned in construing K.S.A. 22-3415 as conferring power on attorney general and district and county attorneys to grant immunity for testimony before an administrative agency. Governmental Ethics Commission v. Cahill, 225 Kan. 772, 777, 594 P.2d 1103.

4. Cited; custodial and investigatory interrogations distinguished; admissibility of defendant's inquisition statements at trial noted; judge's role examined. State v. Cathey, 241 Kan. 715, 720, 741 P.2d 738 (1987).

5. Rights, under 5 th Amendment to United States constitution, of persons called as witnesses in inquisition. In re Investigation into Homicide of T.H., 23 Kan. App. 2d 471, 473, 475, 932 P.2d 1023 (1997).

6. Requirements of a Kastigar hearing on use and derivative use immunity is analyzed. State v. Carapezza, 293 Kan. 1071, 272 P.3d 10 (2012).

 | Next

  6/03/2024 Meeting Notice Agenda
  LCC Policies

  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

Session Laws

Kansas Legislature
Administrative Services
Division of Post Audit
Research Department