K.S.A. § 21-3428
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
KS-LEGkslegislature.org
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
21-3428.
History: L. 1969, ch. 180, § 21-3428; L. 1992, ch. 298, § 18; L. 1993, ch. 291, § 42; Repealed, L. 2010, ch. 136, § 307; July 1, 2011.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases, 1994–2014 · leading case: State v. Neufeld
State v. Neufeld (1996)
“Further, Neufeld alleged that the blackmail statute (K.S.A. 21-3428) was unconstitutionally vague and overbroad and violated the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and § 11 of the Kansas Constitution Bill of Rights.”
State v. Brooks (2011)
“" In pertinent part, K.S.A. 21-3428 provides: "Blackmail is gaining or attempting to gain anything of value or compelling another to act against such person's will, by threatening to communicate accusations or statements about any person that would subject such person or any…”
State v. Brooks (2014)
“Simply stated, while these may be the actions of someone who succumbed to conspiracy or blackmail, they are not the actions of someone immobilized or 'paralyzed by fear.”
State v. Blockman (1994)
“While the new crime of blackmail (K.S.A. 21-3428) encompasses much of what was the crime of extortion, aspects of the common-law crime of extortion remain under K.”
In Re Pyle (2004)
“” In a footnote to the final hearing report, the panel opined that Pyle also may have committed blackmail, pursuant to K.S.A. 21-3428. The panel’s conclusion on Pyle’s motives is adequately supported by the evidence and the panel’s judgment on his credibility.”
State v. Braun (2012)
“So with these rules in mind, let’s look at the Kansas blackmail statute as it existed when Braun is alleged to have committed this crime: K.S.A. 21-3428. We have added some bracketed numbers to show the statute’s structure.”
State v. Brooks (2011)
“" In pertinent part, K.S.A. 21-3428 provides: "Blackmail is gaining or attempting to gain anything of value or compelling another to act against such person's will, by threatening to communicate accusations or statements about any person that would subject such person or any…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.