21-4604.
History: L. 1969, ch. 180, § 21-4604; L. 1970, ch. 124, § 12; L. 1978, ch. 120, § 6; L. 1980, ch. 101, § 1; L. 1984, ch. 112, § 5; L. 1985, ch. 110, § 1; L. 1991, ch. 90, § 1; L. 1992, ch. 239, § 239; L. 1993, ch. 291, § 184; L. 1994, ch. 291, § 45; Repealed, L. 2010, ch. 136, § 307; July 1, 2011.
Source or Prior Law:
62-2238.
Cross References to Related Sections:
Presentence commitment to state hospital or local mental health facility for mental examination, evaluation and report, see 22-3429.
Victim impact statement in DUI cases, see 8-1019.
Law Review and Bar Journal References:
Effects of the legislature's failure to provide for mandatory presentence investigation discussed in an article on sentencing policy, Raymond W. Baker, 10 W.L.J. 267, 279 (1971).
"The Kansas State Reception and Diagnostic Center: An Empirical Study," 19 K.L.R. 821, 822, 827 (1971).
"Survey of Kansas Law: Criminal Law and Procedure," Keith G. Meyer, 27 K.L.R. 391, 394 (1979).
"The Admissibility of Child Victim Hearsay in Kansas: A Defense Perspective," Christopher B. McNeil, 23 W.L.J. 265, 282 (1984).
"Criminal Procedure Survey of Recent Cases," 49 K.L.R. 937 (2001).
Attorney General's Opinions:
Habitual violators; suspension date of drivers' licenses. 87-29.
Reporting of abuse or neglect of children; court services officers. 89-100.
Victim impact statement does not attempt to improperly influence judge. 96-13.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Referred to; motion to vacate sentences under K.S.A. 60-1507; no grounds for relief. Burns v. State, 215 Kan. 497, 500, 524 P.2d 737.
2. Applied; trial court's sentencing procedure pursuant to act not erroneous. State v. Collins, 215 Kan. 789, 791, 528 P.2d 1221.
3. Mentioned in holding that a defendant is to be considered convicted of a crime even though not yet sentenced. State v. Holmes, 222 Kan. 212, 214, 563 P.2d 480.
4. Section mentioned in discussing court's discretion to permit guilty plea withdrawal after presentence report obtained. Burden v. State, 225 Kan. 549, 554, 592 P.2d 451.
5. The trial judge has discretion to order a psychiatric examination of a complaining witness in a sex crime case. State v. Gregg, 226 Kan. 481, 485, 602 P.2d 85.
6. Exception to mandatory report in effect at time of sentencing; seven-month old report available; no error in not requiring second report. State v. Lovelace, 227 Kan. 348, 355, 607 P.2d 49.
7. Considered in construing K.S.A. 21-4603 as permitting district court to retain jurisdiction and act on timely motion for probation or sentence reduction after 120-day period. State ex rel. Owens v. Hodge, 230 Kan. 804, 812, 641 P.2d 399 (1982).
8. Judge's personal knowledge of defendant held acceptable substitute for presentence investigation. State v. Wright, 7 Kan. App. 2d 631, 632, 633, 634, 635, 636, 646 P.2d 1128 (1982).
9. Failure to require presentence investigation for defendant sentenced under K.S.A. 21-4618 not prejudicial error. State v. Korbel, 231 Kan. 657, 662, 663, 647 P.2d 1301 (1982).
10. The 5 th Amendment privilege against self-incrimination extends at least through sentencing; direct contempt adjudication reversed. State v. Rucas, 12 Kan. App. 2d 68, 73, 734 P.2d 673 (1987).
11. Cited; objectives and policies in K.S.A. 21-4601 regarding sentencing court's inability to compel production of documents regarding prison conditions examined. State ex rel. Stephan v. Clark, 243 Kan. 561, 568, 759 P.2d 119 (1988).
12. Whether court erred by not strictly applying rules of evidence in admitting presentence investigation report examined. State v. Sims, 256 Kan. 533, 545, 887 P.2d 72 (1994).
13. Trial court did not abuse discretion in admitting impact statement of murder victim's sister-in-law. State v. Parks, 265 Kan. 644, 649, 962 P.2d 486 (1998).
|
|