22-3101. Inquisitions; witnesses. (1) If the attorney general, an assistant attorney general, the county attorney or the district attorney of any county is informed or has knowledge of any alleged violation of the laws of Kansas, such person may apply to a district judge to conduct an inquisition. An application for an inquisition shall be in writing, verified under oath, setting forth the alleged violation of law. Upon the filing of the application, the judge with whom it is filed, on the written praecipe of such attorney, shall issue a subpoena for the witnesses named in such praecipe commanding them to appear and testify concerning the matters under investigation. Such subpoenas shall be served and returned as subpoenas for witnesses in criminal cases in the district court.
(2) If the attorney general, assistant attorney general, county attorney or district attorney, or in the absence of the county or district attorney a designated assistant county or district attorney, is informed or has knowledge of any alleged violation in this state pertaining to terrorism, illegal use of weapons of mass destruction, gambling, intoxicating liquors, criminal syndicalism, racketeering, bribery, tampering with a sports contest, narcotic or dangerous drugs or any violation of any law where the accused is a fugitive from justice, such attorney shall be authorized to issue subpoenas for such persons as such attorney has any reason to believe or has any information relating thereto or knowledge thereof, to appear before such attorney at a time and place to be designated in the subpoena and testify concerning any such violation. For such purposes, any prosecuting attorney shall be authorized to administer oaths. If an assistant county or district attorney is designated by the county or district attorney for the purposes of this subsection, such designation shall be filed with the chief judge of such judicial district.
(3) Each witness shall be sworn to make true answers to all questions propounded to such witness touching the matters under investigation. The testimony of each witness shall be reduced to writing and signed by the witness. Any person who disobeys a subpoena issued for such appearance or refuses to be sworn as a witness or answer any proper question propounded during the inquisition, may be adjudged in contempt of court and punished by fine and imprisonment.
History: L. 1970, ch. 129, § 22-3101; L. 1976, ch. 145, § 107; L. 1994, ch. 348, § 7; L. 1999, ch. 57, § 31; L. 2006, ch. 146, § 10; July 1.
Source or Prior Law:
62-301.
Law Review and Bar Journal References:
Use of mandamus to vacate interlocutory orders, 11 W.L.J. 491, 493, (1972).
"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, 468 (1994).
"When Good Property Goes Bad," Colin D. Wood, 70 J.K.B.A. No. 3, 24 (2001).
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Cited in mandamus action by attorney general contesting district court judge's restraining order; mandamus held proper remedy. State v. Rohleder, 208 Kan. 193, 490 P.2d 374.
2. Court did not improperly limit discovery and inspection of prosecution evidence. State v. Campbell, 217 Kan. 756, 781, 539 P.2d 329.
3. Section cited as policy in giving immunity to district attorney. Sampson v. Rumsey, 1 Kan. App. 2d 191, 197, 563 P.2d 506.
4. Hearing in chambers proper to determine validity of claim by a witness of privilege against self-incrimination. State v. McQueen & Hardyway, 224 Kan. 420, 428, 429, 582 P.2d 251.
5. Inquisition within limits of section; appellant's right to refuse to answer questions upheld; plea bargaining terms construed. State v. Talsma, 2 Kan. App. 2d 551, 552, 584 P.2d 145.
6. Prosecuting attorneys conducting inquisitions under subsection (2) authorized to issue subpoenas duces tecum. Southwestern Bell Tel. Co. v. Miller, 2 Kan. App. 2d 558, 559, 560, 583 P.2d 1042.
7. District court has inherent power to refuse to issue subpoenas hereunder to prevent abuse of inquisition process. State ex rel. Cranford v. Bishop, 230 Kan. 799, 800, 801, 802, 803, 640 P.2d 1271 (1982).
8. County attorney may properly hold inquisitions after prosecution has commenced. State v. Hobson, 234 Kan. 133, 141, 143, 671 P.2d 1365 (1983).
9. Cited; inquisition as one-man grand jury, admissibility of defendant's inquisition statements at trial noted; judge's role examined. State v. Cathey, 241 Kan. 715, 721, 741 P.2d 738 (1987).
10. Violations of campaign finance act (K.S.A. 25-4142 et seq.), and acts constituting concealment examined. State v. Palmer, 248 Kan. 681, 682, 810 P.2d 734 (1991).
11. Appeal of conviction of theft by deception; motion to suppress bank and telephone records denied; defendant without standing to challenge inquisition subpoenas. State v. Schultz, 252 Kan. 819, 822, 825, 850 P.2d 818 (1993).
12. Rights, under 5 th Amendment to United States constitution, of persons called as witnesses in inquisition; powers to quash subpoena; questioning of witnesses. In re Investigation into Homicide of T.H., 23 Kan. App. 2d 471, 475, 480, 482, 485, 932 P.2d 1023 (1997).
13. Mandamus granted; inquisition action of attorney general to obtain unredacted records of 90 women who obtained abortions denied. Alpha Med. Clinic v. Anderson, 280 Kan. 903, 128 P.3d 364 (2006).
14. Cited; authority to issue subpoenas includes authority to issue subpoenas duces tecum. Tiller v. Corrigan, 286 Kan. 30, 35, 38, 182 P.3d 719 (2008).
15. Cited; court imposes sanctions on former attorney general relating to records taken from attorney general's office. Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood v. Kline, 287 Kan. 372, 375, 197 P.3d 370 (2008).
|
|