K.S.A. » Chapter 21

K.S.A. § 21-3755

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KS-LEGkslegislature.org JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

21-3755.

History: L. 1985, ch. 108, § 1; L. 1992, ch. 298, § 51; L. 1993, ch. 291, § 93; L. 1994, ch. 291, § 34; L. 1997, ch. 66, § 2; Repealed, L. 2010, ch. 136, § 307; July 1, 2011.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 9 cases, 1996–2012 · leading case: State v. Rupnick
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Rupnick (2005) kan · cites it 24× “21-3755(b)(1)(C) defines computer crime as "intentionally exceeding the limits of authorization and damaging, modifying, altering, destroying, copying, disclosing or taking possession of a computer, computer system, computer network or any other property." "Modifying,"…”
State v. Allen (1996) kan · cites it 14× “In its oral ruling, the trial court noted K.S.A. 21-3755 was unclear. The court then held the mere fact Allen made telephone calls, a legal activity, which resulted in the connection of two modems, was insufficient to prove he had “gained access” to Southwestern Bell’s computer…”
State v. Brooks (2011) kanctapp · cites it 10× “3d 541 (2005) (The court holds the term "copying," as used in K.S.A. 21-3755, adequately conveys notice of the prohibited conduct and finds the violation depends not on "how much of an original was .”
United States v. Kennedy (2000) ksd · cites it 3× “” There is no evidence that Road Runner’s employees have been investigated for or charged with a violation of K.S.A. 21-3755, much less convicted. Counsel would express outrage if this court disregarded the presumption of innocence and referred to defendant as a "criminal.”
Briggs v. State (1998) md · cites it 2× “1997); Kan. Stat. Ann § 21-3755 (1995); Ky.Rev.Stat.”
State v. Hall (2011) kanctapp “21-3701, and computer crime in violation of K.S.A. 21-3755. At Hall’s ensuing jury trial, Detective Jordan, the Udells, the Hardins, and an AVImark support technician testified consistent with the earlier mentioned facts.”
State v. Sood (2012) kanctapp · cites it 9× “: Baldhir Sood appeals from his convictions by a jury of one count of computer fraud, in violation of K.S.A. 21-3755, and one count of attempted theft, in violation of K.”
State v. Brooks (2011) kan · cites it 5× “3d 541 (2005) (The court holds the term "copying," as used in K.S.A. 21-3755, adequately conveys notice of the prohibited conduct and finds the violation depends not on "how much of an original was .”
Commonwealth v. Farley (1996) masssuperct “§53a-250(l) (“to instruct, communicate with, store data in, or retrieve data from a computer, computer system, or computer network”); Kan. Stat. Ann. §21-3755 (a)(l) (“to approach, instruct, communicate with, store data in, retrieve data from, or otherwise make use of any…”
— K.S.A. § 21-3755(a)(1) — 2 cases
State v. Rupnick (2005) kan “21-3755(b)(1)(C) defines computer crime as "intentionally exceeding the limits of authorization and damaging, modifying, altering, destroying, copying, disclosing or taking possession of a computer, computer system, computer network or any other property." "Modifying,"…”
State v. Allen (1996) kan “In its oral ruling, the trial court noted K.S.A. 21-3755 was unclear. The court then held the mere fact Allen made telephone calls, a legal activity, which resulted in the connection of two modems, was insufficient to prove he had “gained access” to Southwestern Bell’s computer…”
— K.S.A. § 21-3755(a)(8) — 2 cases
State v. Brooks (2011) kanctapp “3d 541 (2005) (The court holds the term "copying," as used in K.S.A. 21-3755, adequately conveys notice of the prohibited conduct and finds the violation depends not on "how much of an original was .”
State v. Brooks (2011) kan “3d 541 (2005) (The court holds the term "copying," as used in K.S.A. 21-3755, adequately conveys notice of the prohibited conduct and finds the violation depends not on "how much of an original was .”
— K.S.A. § 21-3755(a)(l) — 1 case
State v. Allen (1996) kan “In its oral ruling, the trial court noted K.S.A. 21-3755 was unclear. The court then held the mere fact Allen made telephone calls, a legal activity, which resulted in the connection of two modems, was insufficient to prove he had “gained access” to Southwestern Bell’s computer…”
— K.S.A. § 21-3755(b) — 1 case
State v. Allen (1996) kan “In its oral ruling, the trial court noted K.S.A. 21-3755 was unclear. The court then held the mere fact Allen made telephone calls, a legal activity, which resulted in the connection of two modems, was insufficient to prove he had “gained access” to Southwestern Bell’s computer…”
— K.S.A. § 21-3755(b)(1) — 1 case
State v. Allen (1996) kan “In its oral ruling, the trial court noted K.S.A. 21-3755 was unclear. The court then held the mere fact Allen made telephone calls, a legal activity, which resulted in the connection of two modems, was insufficient to prove he had “gained access” to Southwestern Bell’s computer…”
— K.S.A. § 21-3755(b)(1)(A) — 2 cases
State v. Brooks (2011) kanctapp “3d 541 (2005) (The court holds the term "copying," as used in K.S.A. 21-3755, adequately conveys notice of the prohibited conduct and finds the violation depends not on "how much of an original was .”
State v. Brooks (2011) kan “3d 541 (2005) (The court holds the term "copying," as used in K.S.A. 21-3755, adequately conveys notice of the prohibited conduct and finds the violation depends not on "how much of an original was .”
— K.S.A. § 21-3755(b)(1)(B) — 1 case
State v. Sood (2012) kanctapp “: Baldhir Sood appeals from his convictions by a jury of one count of computer fraud, in violation of K.S.A. 21-3755, and one count of attempted theft, in violation of K.”
— K.S.A. § 21-3755(b)(1)(C) — 3 cases
State v. Rupnick (2005) kan “21-3755(b)(1)(C) defines computer crime as "intentionally exceeding the limits of authorization and damaging, modifying, altering, destroying, copying, disclosing or taking possession of a computer, computer system, computer network or any other property." "Modifying,"…”
State v. Brooks (2011) kanctapp “3d 541 (2005) (The court holds the term "copying," as used in K.S.A. 21-3755, adequately conveys notice of the prohibited conduct and finds the violation depends not on "how much of an original was .”
State v. Brooks (2011) kan “3d 541 (2005) (The court holds the term "copying," as used in K.S.A. 21-3755, adequately conveys notice of the prohibited conduct and finds the violation depends not on "how much of an original was .”
— K.S.A. § 21-3755(b)(2) — 2 cases
State v. Brooks (2011) kanctapp “3d 541 (2005) (The court holds the term "copying," as used in K.S.A. 21-3755, adequately conveys notice of the prohibited conduct and finds the violation depends not on "how much of an original was .”
State v. Brooks (2011) kan “3d 541 (2005) (The court holds the term "copying," as used in K.S.A. 21-3755, adequately conveys notice of the prohibited conduct and finds the violation depends not on "how much of an original was .”
— K.S.A. § 21-3755(b)(l) — 1 case
State v. Allen (1996) kan “In its oral ruling, the trial court noted K.S.A. 21-3755 was unclear. The court then held the mere fact Allen made telephone calls, a legal activity, which resulted in the connection of two modems, was insufficient to prove he had “gained access” to Southwestern Bell’s computer…”
— K.S.A. § 21-3755(b)(l)(A) — 1 case
State v. Brooks (2011) kanctapp “3d 541 (2005) (The court holds the term "copying," as used in K.S.A. 21-3755, adequately conveys notice of the prohibited conduct and finds the violation depends not on "how much of an original was .”
— K.S.A. § 21-3755(b)(l)(B) — 1 case
State v. Sood (2012) kanctapp “: Baldhir Sood appeals from his convictions by a jury of one count of computer fraud, in violation of K.S.A. 21-3755, and one count of attempted theft, in violation of K.”
— K.S.A. § 21-3755(b)(l)(C) — 1 case
State v. Brooks (2011) kanctapp “3d 541 (2005) (The court holds the term "copying," as used in K.S.A. 21-3755, adequately conveys notice of the prohibited conduct and finds the violation depends not on "how much of an original was .”
— K.S.A. § 21-3755(d) — 1 case
State v. Rupnick (2005) kan “21-3755(b)(1)(C) defines computer crime as "intentionally exceeding the limits of authorization and damaging, modifying, altering, destroying, copying, disclosing or taking possession of a computer, computer system, computer network or any other property." "Modifying,"…”
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.