K.S.A. » Chapter 21
Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 21-3509 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KS-LEGkslegislature.org JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

21-3509.

History: L. 1969, ch. 180, § 21-3509; Repealed, L. 1992, ch. 298, § 97; Repealed, L. 1993, ch. 291, § 283; July 1.

CASE ANNOTATIONS

1. No error in failure to instruct jury on lewd and lascivious behavior or indecent solicitation of a child; conviction affirmed. State v. Gregg, 226 Kan. 481, 482, 483, 602 P.2d 85.

2. Cited; right to counsel infringed where law partner represents another charged with same crime and conflict arises. State v. Lem'Mons, 238 Kan. 1, 2, 705 P.2d 552 (1985).

3. What actions necessary to toll statute of limitations (K.S.A. 21-3106) discussed. State v. Mills, 238 Kan. 189, 708 P.2d 1079 (1985).

4. Delays in holding trial caused by defendant's motion for competency hearing, basis of search warrant examined. State v. Prewett, 246 Kan. 39, 40, 785 P.2d 956 (1990).

5. Aggravated sexual battery (K.S.A. 21-3518) as not lesser included crime of rape, (K.S.A. 21-3502) examined; holdings to the contrary disapproved. State v. Gibson, 246 Kan. 298, 302, 787 P.2d 1176 (1990).


Previous | Next

www.ksrevisor.gov 2026
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1979–2022 · leading case: State v. Gregg, 602 P.2d 85 (Kan. 1979).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Gregg, 602 P.2d 85 (Kan. 1979). · cites it 3× “21-3506 (B felony) Lesser Enticement of a Child K.S.A. 21-3509 (D felony) Included Aggravated Indecent Given: Solicitation of a Child K.”
State v. Clements, 734 P.2d 1096 (Kan. 1987). · cites it 2× “60-455 in cases involving psychologically deviant sexual behavior, which includes child sexual abuse, incest, and forcible rape.”
John Doe v. M.J., 508 P.3d 368 (Kan. 2022). “21-5504, and amendments thereto; (D) enticement of a child as defined in K.S.A. 21-3509, prior to its repeal; (E) indecent solicitation of a child as defined in K.”
State v. Mills, 707 P.2d 1079 (Kan. 1985). · cites it 2× “Mills with enticement of a child in violation of K.S.A. 21-3509. The district court, in a pretrial ruling upon a motion filed by Mills, dismissed the charge, finding that the action was barred by the statute of limitations, K.”
Ripley v. Tolbert, 921 P.2d 1210 (Kan. 1996). “21-3506 and amendments thereto; (D) enticement of a child as defined in K.S.A. 21-3509 and amendments thereto; (E) indecent solicitation of a child as defined in K.”
State v. Lem'Mons, 705 P.2d 552 (Kan. 1985). · cites it 2× “21-3503[1][b]); and enticement of a child (K.S.A. 21-3509). The child was interviewed several times by sheriff's deputies in which interviews the child made similar accusations against her father and a third man, in addition to repeating her charges against the defendant.”
State v. Gibson, 787 P.2d 1176 (Kan. 1990). “K.S.A. 21-3509 (enticement of a child), 21-3510 (indecent solicitation of a child), and 21-3511 (aggravated indecent solicitation of a child) are examples of specific crimes which refer to an “unlawful sexual act” in setting forth the elements of each specific crime.”
Cosgrove v. Kansas Dep't of Soc. & Rehab. Servs., 162 F. App'x 823 (10th Cir. 2006). “21-3506 and amendments thereto; (D) enticement of a child as defined in K.S.A. 21-3509 and amendments thereto; (E) indecent solicitation of a child as defined in K.”
State v. Prewett, 785 P.2d 956 (Kan. 1990). “21-3502; and two counts of enticement of a child, K.S.A. 21-3509. Prewett was sentenced to life imprisonment on each count of murder and aggravated kidnapping.”
Shirley v. Reif, 920 P.2d 405 (Kan. 1996). “21-3506 and amendments thereto; (D) enticement of a child as defined in K.S.A. 21-3509 and amendments thereto; (E) indecent solicitation of a child as defined in K.”
John Doe v. M.J., 482 P.3d 596 (Kan. Ct. App. 2021). “21-5504, and amendments thereto; (D) enticement of a child as defined in K.S.A. 21-3509, prior to its repeal; (E) indecent solicitation of a child as defined in K.”
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.