21-3718.
History: L. 1969, ch. 180, § 21-3718; L. 1992, ch. 239, § 117; L. 1993, ch. 291, § 76; L. 1994, ch. 291, § 29; L. 2000, ch. 181, § 6; L. 2002, ch. 155, § 1; L. 2009, ch. 32, § 26; Repealed, L. 2010, ch. 136, § 307; July 1, 2011.
Source or Prior Law:
21-581, 21-582, 21-583, 21-584, 21-585, 21-586.
Law Review and Bar Journal References:
"Defending the Arson Case," Pedro L. Irigonegaray, XIV J.K.T.L.A. No. 2, 12 (1990).
"2002 Legislative Wrap Up," Paul T. Davis, 71 J.K.B.A. No. 7, 15 (2002).
"Relating Kansas Offenses," Tom Stacy, 56 K.L.R. 831 (2008).
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Motion for new trial on ground of newly discovered evidence properly denied. State v. Rincones, 209 Kan. 176, 495 P.2d 1019.
2. Court did not err in refusing requested instruction on damage. State v. McVeigh, 213 Kan. 432, 439, 516 P.2d 918.
3. Venue question not necessarily determined by conviction hereunder rather than conviction under K.S.A. 21-3719. State v. Pyle, 216 Kan. 423, 433, 532 P.2d 1309.
4. Information surreptitiously obtained inadmissible. State v. Daugherty, 221 Kan. 612, 613, 562 P.2d 42.
5. Exclusion of evidence of witness' conviction under section upheld; not inherently crime of dishonesty reflecting on credibility. State v. Brown, 6 Kan. App. 2d 556, 558, 630 P.2d 731 (1981).
6. Relevant testimony excluded; new trial ordered. State v. Belt, 6 Kan. App. 2d 585, 631 P.2d 674 (1981).
7. Change of venue denied absent showing that pretrial publicity was prejudicial; mental deficiencies of defendant not conclusive factor in determining voluntariness of confession. State v. Moss, 7 Kan. App. 2d 215, 640 P.2d 321 (1982).
8. Confidential communications between spouses admissible when inadvertently obtained by third party. State v. Myers, 230 Kan. 697, 640 P.2d 1245 (1982).
9. Admission of in-custody statement made after demand for attorney held prejudicial error. State v. Carty, 231 Kan. 282, 288, 289, 644 P.2d 407 (1982).
10. Fruit of the poisonous tree doctrine inapplicable where wife's voluntary statements not protected by marital privilege. State v. Newman, 235 Kan. 29, 43, 680 P.2d 257 (1984).
11. Proof required for conviction; admissibility of expert testimony; multiple charges based on single act. State v. Powell, 9 Kan. App. 2d 748, 751, 687 P.2d 1375 (1984).
12. Certificate to practice law voluntarily surrendered; disbarred following conviction hereof and exhaustion of appeals. In re Wiswell, 236 Kan. 311, 691 P.2d 391 (1984).
13. Evidence required to establish crime, what constitutes interest in another person examined. State v. Houck, 240 Kan. 130, 727 P.2d 460 (1986).
14. Phrase "any interest" includes leasehold interest in real property. State v. Johnson, 12 Kan. App. 2d 239, 243, 738 P.2d 872 (1987).
15. Cited; when motion to modify acts as probation request (K.S.A. 21-4603), no direct appeal from probation denial (K.S.A. 22-3602) examined. State v. Deavours, 12 Kan. App. 2d 361, 743 P.2d 1011 (1987).
16. Cited; comparison of K.S.A. 21-3718, 21-3719 with statute listing different drug substances (K.S.A. 65-4107) as supporting separate crimes examined. State v. McMannis, 12 Kan. App. 2d 464, 465, 747 P.2d 1343 (1987).
17. Cited; felony murder rule (K.S.A. 21-3401) as not excluding killing of co-felon from its application examined. State v. Hoang, 243 Kan. 40, 41, 755 P.2d 7 (1988).
18. Distinction of arson from criminal damage to property (K.S.A. 21-3720) allegations in information to sustain convictions examined. Zapata v. State, 14 Kan. App. 2d 94, 98, 782 P.2d 1251 (1989).
19. Manifest necessity in declaring mistrial; second trial as not constituting double jeopardy examined. In re Habeas Corpus Petition of Hoang, 245 Kan. 560, 781 P.2d 731 (1989).
20. Aggravated sexual battery not included crime of aggravated criminal sodomy (K.S.A. 21-3506) or indecent liberties with child (K.S.A. 21-3503). State v. Damewood, 245 Kan. 676, 686, 783 P.2d 1249 (1989).
21. Sufficiency of evidence, instructions on reasonable doubt, evidence of prior crimes, prosecutorial statements in closing arguments examined. State v. Dunn, 249 Kan. 488, 489, 820 P.2d 412 (1991).
22. Speedy trial issue, admissibility of prior crimes, habitual criminal act sentencing requirements examined. State v. Maggard, 16 Kan. App. 2d 743, 744, 829 P.2d 591 (1992).
23. In context of aggravated arson statute, a "human being" means a living person; insufficient evidence to support conviction of aggravated arson, defendant resentenced for arson. State v. Kingsley, 252 Kan. 761, 779, 851 P.2d 370 (1993).
24. Whether jury instructions failed to include all essential elements of offense requiring convictions be set aside examined. State v. Duke, 256 Kan. 703, 712, 887 P.2d 110 (1994).
25. Whether convictions of arson and conspiracy to commit arson are multiplicitous and enhancement of defendant's sentence under habitual criminal act examined. State v. Eastridge, 20 Kan. App. 2d 973, 977, 984, 894 P.2d 243 (1995).
26. Trial court jury instruction on attempted aggravated arson clearly erroneous; term explosive defined. State v. Walker, 21 Kan. App. 2d 950, 952, 910 P.2d 868 (1996).
|
|