Law Review and Bar Journal References:

Discussion of relevant evidence, Spencer A. Gard, 14 K.L.R. 263, 266 (1965).

"Evidence of Other Crimes in Kansas," Chad M. Renn, 17 W.L.J. 98, 117 (1977).

"Hearsay Explaining Police Actions: The Proper Objection," Russell M. Coombs, 46 J.B.A.K. 157, 159 (1977).

"Evidence of Similar Incidents and Settlements on Proof of Defect in Products Liability Cases," Jerry R. Palmer, 3 J.K.T.L.A. No. 6, 14, 15 (1980).

"Constitutional Law: Burden of Proof—Clear and Convincing Evidence Required to Terminate Parental Rights," Josephine Fiore, 22 W.L.J. 140, 143 (1982).

"The New Kansas Drunk Driving Law: A Closer Look," Matthew D. Keenan, 31 K.L.R. 409, 413 (1983).

"Evidence: Settlement Offers Not Relevant For Mitigating Punitive Damages," James B. Albertson, 23 W.L.J. 452, 457 (1984).

"A Fresh Look at Hypothetical Questions and Ultimate Issues: The Kansas Experience," Stanley D. Davis, 36 K.L.R. 311, 320, 328 (1989).

"Will Contests in Kansas," Dennis M. Feeney & Jeffery L. Carmichael, 64 J.K.B.A. No. 7, 22, 23 (1995).

"The Marital Discord Exemption to Hearsay: Fact or Judicially Legislated Fiction?" Christine Arguello, 46 K.L.R. 63 (1997).

"Other Misconduct Evidence," Christopher M. Joseph, 49 K.L.R. 145 (2000).

"Motions in Limine: Where Evidence Stands on the Threshold," Derek S. Casey, J.K.T.L.A. Vol. 29, No. 4, 4 (2006).

"Keeping Out the No Damage Pictures in a Minimal Impact Collision Case," Ryan E. Hodge, J.K.T.L.A. Vol. 30, No. 5, 10 (2007).

"Discovery Tools: Requests For Production of Documents (Part 3)," James R. Howell, 34 J.K.A.J. No. 4, 6 (2011).

Attorney General's Opinions:

Professional license or registration disciplinary proceedings; definitions; burden of proof. 95-54.

CASE ANNOTATIONS

1. Procedure in action to determine reasonableness of zoning (K.S.A. 12-712) governed by code. Bodine v. City of Overland Park, 198 Kan. 371, 386, 424 P.2d 513.

2. Evidence not excluded because it is self-serving. Thompson v. Norman, 198 Kan. 436, 441, 424 P.2d 593.

3. Relevancy of testimony considered. Bingham v. Hillcrest Bowl, Inc., 199 Kan. 40, 47, 427 P.2d 591.

4. Witness may testify as to purchase price of neighboring tracts of land in condemnation proceeding. City of Wichita v. Jennings, 199 Kan. 621, 625, 433 P.2d 351.

5. Evidence held to be "relevant evidence" as herein defined. State v. Gauger, 200 Kan. 563, 565, 438 P.2d 463.

6. Subsections (a) and (b) cited in discussing relevancy of certain evidence relating to issues of possession, payment of rents and notice to vacate. Guy Pine, Inc. v. Chrysler Motors Corp., 201 Kan. 371, 374, 440 P.2d 595.

7. Subsection (a) applied; impeachment of witness by use of prior inconsistent statement. State v. Jones, 202 Kan. 31, 48, 446 P.2d 851.

8. Erroneous exclusions of photographs not prejudicial when facts otherwise shown. Shepard v. Dick, 203 Kan. 164, 169, 453 P.2d 134.

9. In case concerning operation of an emergency vehicle, evidence properly admitted hereunder. Scogin v. Nugen, 204 Kan. 568, 571, 464 P.2d 166.

10. Relevant evidence tending to prove material fact is admissible unless expressly excluded from evidence by codified rules. Williams v. Union Pacific Railroad Co., 204 Kan. 772, 780, 465 P.2d 975.

11. An expert witness, on direct examination, may testify as to the purchase price of specific tracts of neighboring land in a condemnation proceeding. Morgan v. City of Overland Park, 207 Kan. 188, 190, 483 P.2d 1079.

12. Expert witness, on direct examination, may testify as to purchase price of neighboring land in condemnation suits. State Highway Commission v. Lee, 207 Kan. 284, 290, 485 P.2d 310.

13. Testimony corroborating testimony of state's principal witness held relevant. State v. Roth, 207 Kan. 691, 696, 697, 486 P.2d 1385.

14. Cited in appeal on question reserved; functions of court and jury discussed in disapproving patterned jury instruction. State v. McClanahan, 212 Kan. 208, 211, 510 P.2d 153.

15. Canister of mace and flare gun found on defendant properly admitted as relevant to show intent. State v. Fagan, 213 Kan. 587, 518 P.2d 552.

16. No abuse of discretion in admitting evidence to form basis for reasonable inference of guilt. State v. Brown, 217 Kan. 595, 599, 538 P.2d 631.

17. Subsection (b) applied; no error in admission of evidence the result of an arrest for different crime. State v. Steward, 219 Kan. 256, 267, 547 P.2d 773.

18. Applied; trial court did not abuse discretion in excluding evidence; action on insurance policies proving coverage for uninsured motorists. Van Hoozer v. Farmers Insurance Exchange, 219 Kan. 595, 613, 549 P.2d 1354.

19. Evidence in criminal prosecution held sufficiently relevant to sustain conviction. State v. Baker, 219 Kan. 854, 858, 549 P.2d 911.

20. Mentioned; admission of journal entry of prior conviction without requiring evidence upheld. State v. Faulkner, 220 Kan. 153, 155, 551 P.2d 1247.

21. Admission of testimony in murder prosecution upheld; relevant. State v. Henson, 221 Kan. 635, 648, 562 P.2d 51.

22. Applied; court did not abuse discretion in refusing to admit exhibits offered. State v. Alderdice, 221 Kan. 684, 689, 561 P.2d 845.

23. Testimony of witness considered and held relevant; admissible. State v. Rueckert, 221 Kan. 727, 728, 738, 561 P.2d 850.

24. Name on certificate of title; real party in interest. Hartley v. Fisher, 1 Kan. App. 2d 362, 363, 566 P.2d 18.

25. Applied in upholding judgment for damages against city action of mob. Jenkins v. City of Bonner Springs, 1 Kan. App. 2d 727, 728, 573 P.2d 1110.

26. Evidence relevant; admissible. Farmers Ins. Exchange v. Schropp, 222 Kan. 612, 624, 567 P.2d 1359.

27. Applied; refusal to admit evidence of independent crime not error; relevancy. State v. Nemechek, 223 Kan. 766, 769, 576 P.2d 682.

28. Mentioned; admission of opinion testimony of police officer investigating automobile accident held error. Lollis v. Superior Sales Co., 224 Kan. 251, 260, 580 P.2d 423.

29. Cited in construing the scope of discovery and relevancy in deposition proceedings under K.S.A. 25-4124. Governmental Ethics Commission v. Cahill, 225 Kan. 772, 778, 594 P.2d 1103.

30. Applied in holding the state in offering proof in conspiracy trial not limited to overt acts alleged in information. State v. Taylor, 2 Kan. App. 2d 532, 534, 583 P.2d 1033.

31. Evidence relating to certain pubic hair deemed relevant evidence; convictions of rape and aggravated kidnapping affirmed. State v. Reed, 226 Kan. 519, 524, 601 P.2d 1125.

32. Subsection (m) cited; magazines are writings; testimony on magazine contents not violative of best evidence rule. State v. Lovelace, 227 Kan. 348, 352, 607 P.2d 49.

33. Mentioned; party must overcome presumption of execution of mortgages by clear and convincing evidence; judgment affirmed. McMurray v. Crawford, 3 Kan. App. 2d 329, 332, 594 P.2d 1109.

34. Taped conversations edited by redaction process not so confusing as to be irrelevant. State v. Wolf, 7 Kan. App. 2d 398, 402, 643 P.2d 1101 (1982).

35. Cited; monetary threshold under K.S.A. 40-3117; reasonableness and necessity of medical bills are jury questions. Cansler v. Harrington, 231 Kan. 66, 69, 643 P.2d 110 (1982).

36. Evidence that blood test failed to exclude alleged father as possible father not admissible in paternity action. State ex rel. Hausner v. Blackman, 7 Kan. App. 2d 693, 698, 648 P.2d 249 (1982).

37. Nontestimonial statement in physician's office records not improperly excluded where made five years before automobile accident. Doty v. Wells, 9 Kan. App. 2d 378, 379, 380, 682 P.2d 672 (1984).

38. Rules apply in preliminary examinations under K.S.A. 22-2902 except to extent relaxed by other court rules or statutes. State v. Cremer, 234 Kan. 594, 597, 600, 676 P.2d 59 (1984).

39. KCC chairman may relax rules of evidence when public interest served and facts more easily ascertained. In re Application of Southwestern Bell Tel. Co., 9 Kan. App. 2d 525, 526, 539, 685 P.2d 304 (1984).

40. Rules not applicable to workers' compensation proceedings, where admissibility is more liberal. Box v. Cessna Aircraft Co., 236 Kan. 237, 243, 689 P.2d 871 (1984).

41. Cited; provisions of K.S.A. 60-460(dd) (statements by children) inapplicable to proceedings under juvenile offender code (K.S.A. 38-1601 et seq). In re Mary P., 237 Kan. 456, 457, 701 P.2d 681 (1985).

42. Introduction of clothing worn during alleged rape upheld as relevant; stains go to weight of evidence. State v. Galloway, 238 Kan. 415, 419, 710 P.2d 1320 (1985).

43. Where character of victim not an issue such evidence irrelevant. State v. McKibben, 239 Kan. 574, 584, 722 P.2d 518 (1986).

44. Where evidence does not bear directly upon issues, some natural or logical connection with inference or result must exist. State v. Walker, 239 Kan. 635, 644, 722 P.2d 556 (1986).

45. Cited; allowing testimony about conversation had with defendant five and one-half months prior to murders examined. State v. Ruebke, 240 Kan. 493, 515, 731 P.2d 842 (1987).

46. Cited; exclusion of inconsistent statement in newspaper article as hearsay examined. State v. Hunter, 241 Kan. 629, 637, 740 P.2d 559 (1987).

47. Cited; admissibility allowed where evidence relevant to both liability and damages and liability admitted. Smelko v. Brinton, 241 Kan. 763, 767, 768, 740 P.2d 591 (1987).

48. Cited; plaintiff's burden in product liability case where needle believed to be in loaf of bread examined. Hazelton v. Safeway Stores, Inc., 12 Kan. App. 2d 377, 384, 745 P.2d 309 (1987).

49. Expert witness testimony regarding psychology and treatability of sexual offenders irrelevant to whether defendant committed offense. State v. Clements, 244 Kan. 411, 415, 421, 770 P.2d 447 (1989).

50. Attempted rape victim's propensity to form social acquaintances with men on spontaneous basis as habit v. character trait examined. State v. Gonzales, 245 Kan. 691, 701, 783 P.2d 1239 (1989).

51. Exclusion of evidence on grounds of remoteness that substantially impairs state's case examined. State v. Griffin, 246 Kan. 320, 324, 787 P.2d 701 (1990).

52. Discretion in permitting prosecutor to inquire why complaining witnesses in prior crimes did not pursue retrials examined. State v. Searles, 246 Kan. 567, 582, 793 P.2d 724 (1990).

53. Admission over objection of sentences imposed in prior felony convictions in unlawful possession (K.S.A. 21-4204) trial held abuse of discretion; reversal not justified. State v. Wagner, 248 Kan. 240, 243, 807 P.2d 139 (1991).

54. Limitation on cross-examination of prison officer regarding separate self-defense killing in murder trial of inmate/defendants examined. State v. Wiggins, 248 Kan. 526, 530, 808 P.2d 1383 (1991).

55. Right of accused to call witnesses on own behalf, court's power to exclude irrelevant evidence noted; relevance examined. State v. Pichon, 15 Kan. App. 2d 527, 532, 811 P.2d 517 (1991).

56. Probative value of evidence versus unfair and harmful surprise to defendant examined. State v. Ji, 251 Kan. 3, 15, 832 P.2d 1176 (1992).

57. Admission of gang membership evidence in trial of juvenile as adult (K.S.A. 38-1636) examined. State v. Hooks, 251 Kan. 755, 765, 840 P.2d 483 (1992).

58. Evidence sufficient to support claim of mitigating circumstances (K.S.A. 21-4626) in sentencing statute examined. State v. Walker, 252 Kan. 279, 304, 845 P.2d 1 (1993).

59. No abuse of discretion in allowance of evidence of gang membership to establish motivation for crime. State v. Tran, 252 Kan. 494, 505, 847 P.2d 680 (1993).

60. No abuse of discretion by trial court in refusal to admit evidence of defendant's behavior subsequent to commission of alleged crimes. State v. Harkness, 252 Kan. 510, 528, 847 P.2d 1191 (1993).

61. Reversal of conviction not required in all cases of erroneous admission of evidence. State v. Thomas, 252 Kan. 564, 579, 847 P.2d 1219 (1993).

62. Admissibility in criminal trial of gruesome photographs examined. State v. Steadman, 253 Kan. 297, 305, 855 P.2d 919 (1993).

63. Relevance of evidence of defendant's gang membership to establish motive for murder examined. State v. Toney, 253 Kan. 651, 654, 862 P.2d 350 (1993).

64. Discretion in excluding testimony by plaintiff's witness regarding respondent's expert witness credibility examined. City of Olathe v. Stotts, 253 Kan. 687, 700, 861 P.2d 1287 (1993).

65. Whether excluding evidence regarding credibility of prosecution witness violated defendant's right to a fair trial examined. State v. Mays, 254 Kan. 479, 486, 866 P.2d 1037 (1994).

66. Whether defendant was denied right to present defense when judge disallowed evidence that defendant was represented on unrelated charges examined. State v. Morris, 255 Kan. 964, 983, 880 P.2d 1244 (1994).

67. Whether admission of sexual bondage accessories prejudiced jury against defendant and were irrelevant examined. State v. Sexton, 256 Kan. 344, 352, 886 P.2d 811 (1994).

68. Whether court abused discretion by suppressing evidence of prior sexual experience of child victim examined. State v. Lavery, 19 Kan. App. 2d 673, 683, 877 P.2d 443 (1994).

69. Whether admission of financial record exhibits was improper because inadequate foundation laid examined. Kampschroeder v. Kampschroeder, 20 Kan. App. 2d 361, 367, 887 P.2d 1152 (1995).

70. Trial court did not abuse discretion by admitting defendant's federal fraud conviction as relevant in marital homicide prosecution. State v. Haddock, 257 Kan. 964, 981, 897 P.2d 152 (1995).

71. Rules of evidence are not applicable in workers compensation proceedings. Armstrong v. City of Wichita, 21 Kan. App. 2d 750, 758, 907 P.2d 923 (1995).

72. Trial court admission of testimony that witness had AIDS did not constitute reversible error. State v. Collier, 259 Kan. 346, 353, 913 P.2d 597 (1996).

73. Evidence of defendant's past participation in sexual act performed on rape victim admissible as evidence of identity. State v. Gaines, 260 Kan. 752, 767, 926 P.2d 641 (1996).

74. Relevant information inadmissible under more specific provisions of K.S.A. 60-422. Shirley v. Smith, 261 Kan. 685, 699, 933 P.2d 651 (1997).

75. Evidence seized during search properly admitted to prove murder, kidnapping and assault charges. State v. Lee, 263 Kan. 97, 103, 948 P.2d 641 (1997).

76. Trial court did not err in admitting allegedly prejudicial photograph as evidence of sexual relationship between defendant and victim. State v. Price, 24 Kan. App. 2d 580, 585, 948 P.2d 1145 (1997).

77. Trial court did not abuse discretion by admitting defendant's bloodstained clothing in murder trial. State v. Gardner, 264 Kan. 95, 104, 955 P.2d 1199 (1998).

78. Exclusion of evidence of defendant's conviction in previous trial for crimes related to charged crime upheld. State v. Mims, 264 Kan. 506, 512, 956 P.2d 1337 (1998).

79. Admission of irrelevant evidence concerning murder victim intended to inflame jury constituted reversible error. State v. Donesay, 265 Kan. 60, 84, 959 P.2d 862 (1998).

80. Presumption that respondent should be tried as an adult rebutted by substantial evidence. In re J.D.J., 266 Kan. 211, 217, 967 P.2d 751 (1998).

81. Trial court erred by admitting evidence not relevant to crimes defendant charged with. State v. Morfitt, 25 Kan. App. 2d 8, 17, 956 P.2d 719 (1998).

82. Relevant evidence is evidence having any tendency, in reason, to prove any relevant fact. State v. Lumley, 266 Kan. 939, 950, 976 P.2d 486 (1999).

83. First degree murder conviction reversed because testimony of victim's mother and prosecutor's comments as to her grief were not material to case. State v. Henry, 273 Kan. 608, 44 P.3d 466 (2002).

84. No error in admitting tape recording of victim's dying gasps in trial for first-degree murder. State v. Abu-Fakher, 274 Kan. 584, 56 P.3d 166 (2002).

85. Cited, defines relevant evidence. State v. Baker, 281 Kan. 997, 1008, 135 P.3d 1098 (2006).

86. Evidence of gang-related affiliation is admissible to show motive for otherwise inexplicable act or witness bias. State v. Winston, 281 Kan. 1114, 1135, 135 P.3d 1072 (2006).

87. In child abuse case, evidence of defendant's other children's behavior did not prove or disprove any material fact and was not relevant. State v. Sanchez, 282 Kan. 307, 314, 144 P.3d 718 (2006).

88. Evidence concerning small dissimilar tract of land not relevant to issue at trial, evidence excluded. Mooney v. City of Overland Park, 283 Kan. 617, 621, 153 P.3d 1252 (2007).

89. Evidence not relevant to material facts. State v. Gaither, 283 Kan. 671, 689, 156 P.3d 602 (2007).

90. Evidence having tendency in reason to prove any material fact is relevant. In re J.D.C., 284 Kan. 155, 162, 159 P.3d 974 (2007).

91. Relevancy discussed; court has discretion to exclude relevant evidence outweighed by prejudicial effect. State v. Scott-Herring, 284 Kan. 172, 176, 159 P.3d 1028 (2007).

92. Cited; evidence of pornographic collection and prior relationship with defendant held relevant. State v. Miller, 284 Kan. 682, 690, 705, 163 P.3d 267 (2007).

93. Evidence of prior crimes permitted to show intent and identity in subsequent prosecution. State v. Garcia, 285 Kan. 1, 169 P.3d 1069 (2007).

94. Evidence of gang activity may be material and relevant when evidence provides a motive. State v. Brown, 285 Kan. 261, 297, 173 P.3d 612 (2007).

95. No reversible error in admitting evidence of firing for stealing and no limiting instruction. State v. Reid, 286 Kan. 494, 504, 507, 509, 186 P.3d 713 (2008).

96. Cited; alleged error in admitting evidence of drug use and addiction; no limiting instruction was error. State v. Carapezza, 286 Kan. 992, 997, 191 P.3d 256 (2008).

97. Cited; evidence of defendant's drug use found probative of motive; lack of limiting instruction erroneous but harmless. State v. Hughes, 286 Kan. 1010, 1020, 191 P.3d 268 (2008).

98. Cited; no error in denying evidence on murder victim's past acts of violence. State v. Henson, 287 Kan. 574, 578, 197 P.3d 456 (2008).

99. Confrontation clause held violated by district court's limitation on cross-examination. State v. Jackson, 39 Kan. App. 2d 89, 94, 177 P.3d 419 (2008).

100. Evidence found to be too remote and no connection between evidence and alleged criminal act. State v. Huntley, 39 Kan. App. 2d 180, 191, 177 P.3d 994 (2008).

101. No error in admitting criminal history evidence in commitment proceeding under the Kansas sexually violent predator act. In re Care and Treatment of Colt, 39 Kan. App. 2d 643, 648, 183 P.3d 4 (2008).

102. Cited; no error in admitting evidence of sex crimes in sentencing proceeding; evidence relevant to fiduciary relationship. State v. Horn, 40 Kan. App. 2d 687, 699, 196 P.3d 379 (2008).

103. Cited; evidence of others not completing a DUI test held not relevant. State v. Garcia, 40 Kan. App. 2d 870, 876, 196 P.3d 943 (2008).

104. Cited; error in admitting evidence of prior bad acts to prove intent, absence of mistake or accident and plan. State v. Prine, 287 Kan. 713, 725, 200 P.3d 1 (2009).

105. Cited; field sobriety tests, certain national highway safety administration standards not admissible, not scientifically reliable. State v. Shadden, 40 Kan. App. 2d 1103, 1106, 199 P.3d 167 (2009).

106. No error in admission of evidence of prior bad acts or photos of victim. State v. Riojas, 288 Kan. 379, 204 P.3d 578 (2009).

107. Under facts, nonsexual prior crimes and civil wrongs were relevant. In re Care & Treatment of Miller, 289 Kan. 218, 210 P.3d 625 (2009).

108. Admission of prior crimes not involving a sexual component are relevant in sexually violent predator commitment proceedings. In re Care & Treatment of Colt, 289 Kan. 234, 211 P.3d 797 (2009).

109. Relevant evidence principles discussed and applied. State v. Houston, 289 Kan. 252, 213 P.3d 728 (2009).

110. Challenge to the admission of certain evidence not upheld; evidence not unduly prejudicial. State v. Ransom, 289 Kan. 373, 212 P.3d 203 (2009).

111. Appellate court upholds admission of evidence regarding defendant's prior drug dealing to show motive and knowledge. State v. Richmond, 289 Kan. 419, 212 P.3d 165 (2009).

112. Evidence is relevant if it has any tendency in reason to prove any material fact. Frick Farm Properties v. Kansas Dept. of Agriculture, 289 Kan. 690, 216 P.3d 170 (2009).

113. Relating to other crime evidence, construed and applied. State v. Blaurock, 41 Kan. App. 2d 178, 201 P.3d 728 (2009).

114. Refusal to admit medical records upheld. State v. Gaona, 41 Kan. App. 2d 1064, 208 P.3d 308 (2009).

115. Relevant evidence is evidence having the tendency in reason to prove any material fact. Foster v. Klaumann, 42 Kan. App. 2d 634, 216 P.3d 671 (2009).

116. Exclusion of evidence on victim's family viewing inappropriate websites not error. State v. Garza, 290 Kan. 1021, 236 P.3d 501 (2010).

117. Multi-step evidentiary analysis is required for appellate review of motion in limine. State v. Shadden, 290 Kan. 803, 235 P.3d 436 (2010).

118. Admission of a video and a slow motion version of the video did not violate the best evidence rule. State v. Dale, 293 Kan. 660, 267 P.3d 743 (2011).

119. A court first determines whether evidence is relevant as defined in K.S.A. 60-401(b) when ruling on a motion in limine. State v. Bridges, 297 Kan. 989, 306 P.3d 244 (2013).

120. A court determines whether evidence is relevant as defined in K.S.A. 60-401(b) when ruling on a motion in limine. State v. Friday, 297 Kan. 1023, 306 P.3d 265 (2013).

121. Audio recordings of jail phone calls qualify as writings under K.S.A. 60-401, and admission of such recordings is governed by K.S.A. 60-464. State v. Jenkins, 311 Kan. 39, 50, 455 P.3d 779 (2020).