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

K.S.A. § 21-4603 (2026)

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

21-4603.

History: L. 1969, ch. 180, § 21-4603; L. 1970, ch. 124, § 11; L. 1971, ch. 113, § 1; L. 1972, ch. 317, § 97; L. 1973, ch. 339, § 69; L. 1974, ch. 147, § 1; L. 1976, ch. 156, § 3; L. 1978, ch. 120, § 5; L. 1980, ch. 104, § 1; L. 1981, ch. 146, § 1; L. 1984, ch. 112, § 4; L. 1984, ch. 124, § 1; L. 1986, ch. 128, § 1; L. 1986, ch. 123, § 6; L. 1986, ch. 136, § 1; L. 1988, ch. 115, § 8; L. 1989, ch. 92, § 2; L. 1990, ch. 99, § 12; L. 1990, ch. 309, § 13; L. 1990, ch. 149, § 1; L. 1991, ch. 88, § 2; L. 1991, ch. 89, § 4; L. 1992, ch. 298, § 92; L. 1993, ch. 291, § 182; L. 1997, ch. 181, § 17; L. 1998, ch. 186, § 1; L. 2000, ch. 182, § 2; L. 2002, ch. 19, § 1; Repealed, L. 2010, ch. 136, § 307; July 1, 2011.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 201 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1972–2022 · leading case: State v. Myers, 697 P.2d 879 (Kan. Ct. App. 1985).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Myers, 697 P.2d 879 (Kan. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 26× “" K.S.A. 1984 Supp. 21-4603(3) provides: "Any time within 120 days after a sentence is imposed .”
State v. Pierce, 787 P.2d 1189 (Kan. 1990). · cites it 21× “In asserting that his statutory rights to counsel have been violated, defendant relies upon K.S.A. 21-4603, K.S.A. 22-4503(a), and K.”
State v. Reed, 811 P.2d 1163 (Kan. 1991). · cites it 19× “Thus, the law that was in effect on that date, K.S.A. 1989 Supp. 21-4603, applies. Historically, K.”
State v. Sutherland, 804 P.2d 970 (Kan. 1991). · cites it 10× “He also contends that K.S.A. 1989 Supp. 21-4603(3) mandates that his sentence be reduced because the State Reception and Diagnostic Center (SRDC) report recommended a modification of the sentence.”
State v. Smith, 377 P.3d 414 (Kan. 2016). · cites it 3× “21-4603(d)(l) [then K.S.A. 1992 Supp. 21-4603(4)(a)]. In other words, a successful sentence modification on a callback motion might change the necessity for or character of an appeal of the original sentence.”
State v. Rice, 430 P.3d 430 (Kan. 2018). · cites it 7× “Rice simultaneously filed a request for an updated PSI under K.S.A. 1992 Supp. 21-4603. In support, he cited the length of time between the original report and his resentencing and the deterioration of his health during that period.”
State Ex Rel. Owens v. Hodge, 641 P.2d 399 (Kan. 1982). · cites it 9× “Turning to the issue presented for determination, we must first examine the provisions of K.S.A. 21-4603, which provide in part as follows: “21-4603.”
State v. Cheun-Phon Ji, 872 P.2d 748 (Kan. 1994). · cites it 8× “K.S.A. 21-4603 has been amended almost every year since the filing of the Myers opinion.”
State v. Martin, 17 P.3d 344 (Kan. 2001). · cites it 5× “K.S.A. 1989 Supp. 21-4603 became effective July 1, 1989.”
State v. Smith, 864 P.2d 1208 (Kan. 1993). · cites it 10× “K.S.A. 1992 Supp. 21-4603 is a lengthy statute dealing generally with what dispositions are authorized in criminal cases.”
State v. Post, 112 P.3d 116 (Kan. 2005). · cites it 6× “801 (1982), the Court of Appeals distinguished the case on the ground that K.S.A. 21-4603 (Ensley 1981), the statute at issue in Chilcote , only applied to crimes that were committed prior to July 1, 1993.”
State v. Reed, 853 P.2d 50 (Kan. 1993). · cites it 11× “*156 The sole issue asserted by the State is whether the district court erred in considering Reed’s second motion to modify his sentence under K.S.A. 1992 Supp. 21-4603 when his first motion, to modify had been denied.”
Show all 201 citing cases →
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(1) — 4 cases
State v. Heffelman, 886 P.2d 823 (Kan. 1994).
State v. Rucas, 734 P.2d 673 (Kan. Ct. App. 1987).
State v. Morse, 855 P.2d 87 (Kan. Ct. App. 1993).
State v. Jacobson, 860 P.2d 47 (Kan. Ct. App. 1993).
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(2) — 34 cases
State v. Fowler, 710 P.2d 1268 (Kan. 1985).
State v. Moses, 607 P.2d 477 (Kan. 1980).
State v. Ball, 877 P.2d 955 (Kan. 1994).
State v. McNaught, 713 P.2d 457 (Kan. 1986).
State v. Post, 112 P.3d 116 (Kan. 2005). “801 (1982), the Court of Appeals distinguished the case on the ground that K.S.A. 21-4603 (Ensley 1981), the statute at issue in Chilcote , only applied to crimes that were committed prior to July 1, 1993.”
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(2)(a) — 7 cases
State v. Keeler, 710 P.2d 1279 (Kan. 1985).
State v. McNaught, 713 P.2d 457 (Kan. 1986).
State v. Post, 112 P.3d 116 (Kan. 2005). “801 (1982), the Court of Appeals distinguished the case on the ground that K.S.A. 21-4603 (Ensley 1981), the statute at issue in Chilcote , only applied to crimes that were committed prior to July 1, 1993.”
State v. Harpool, 788 P.2d 281 (Kan. 1990).
State v. Fowler, 710 P.2d 1268 (Kan. 1985).
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(2)(b) — 4 cases
State v. Beechum, 833 P.2d 988 (Kan. 1992).
State v. Ball, 877 P.2d 955 (Kan. 1994).
State v. Ramsey, 819 P.2d 667 (Kan. Ct. App. 1991).
State v. Loffer, 947 P.2d 458 (Kan. Ct. App. 1997).
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(2)(c) — 8 cases
State v. Carr, 53 P.3d 843 (Kan. 2002).
State v. Bowers, 721 P.2d 268 (Kan. 1986).
State v. Clemons, 836 P.2d 1147 (Kan. 1992).
State v. McNaught, 713 P.2d 457 (Kan. 1986).
State v. Saft, 769 P.2d 675 (Kan. 1989).
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(2)(d) — 2 cases
State v. McNaught, 713 P.2d 457 (Kan. 1986).
State v. Johnson, 634 P.2d 1137 (Kan. Ct. App. 1981).
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(2)(e) — 3 cases
State v. Post, 112 P.3d 116 (Kan. 2005). “801 (1982), the Court of Appeals distinguished the case on the ground that K.S.A. 21-4603 (Ensley 1981), the statute at issue in Chilcote , only applied to crimes that were committed prior to July 1, 1993.”
State v. Hicks, 714 P.2d 105 (Kan. Ct. App. 1986).
State v. Post, 96 P.3d 662 (Kan. Ct. App. 2004).
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(2)(f) — 1 case
State v. Bailey (Kan. 2017).
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(2)(g) — 1 case
State v. Williams, 856 P.2d 158 (Kan. Ct. App. 1993).
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(2)(h) — 1 case
State v. Clemons, 836 P.2d 1147 (Kan. 1992).
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(2)(i) — 3 cases
State v. DeHerrera, 834 P.2d 918 (Kan. 1992).
State v. O'Connell, 861 P.2d 138 (Kan. Ct. App. 1993).
State v. Moses, 872 P.2d 265 (Kan. 1994).
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(3) — 41 cases
State v. Myers, 697 P.2d 879 (Kan. Ct. App. 1985). “" K.S.A. 1984 Supp. 21-4603(3) provides: "Any time within 120 days after a sentence is imposed .”
State v. Pierce, 787 P.2d 1189 (Kan. 1990). “In asserting that his statutory rights to counsel have been violated, defendant relies upon K.S.A. 21-4603, K.S.A. 22-4503(a), and K.”
State v. Sutherland, 804 P.2d 970 (Kan. 1991). “He also contends that K.S.A. 1989 Supp. 21-4603(3) mandates that his sentence be reduced because the State Reception and Diagnostic Center (SRDC) report recommended a modification of the sentence.”
State v. Saft, 769 P.2d 675 (Kan. 1989).
State Ex Rel. Owens v. Hodge, 641 P.2d 399 (Kan. 1982). “Turning to the issue presented for determination, we must first examine the provisions of K.S.A. 21-4603, which provide in part as follows: “21-4603.”
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(3)(a) — 13 cases
State v. Reed, 811 P.2d 1163 (Kan. 1991). “Thus, the law that was in effect on that date, K.S.A. 1989 Supp. 21-4603, applies. Historically, K.”
State v. Martin, 17 P.3d 344 (Kan. 2001). “K.S.A. 1989 Supp. 21-4603 became effective July 1, 1989.”
State v. Sylva, 804 P.2d 967 (Kan. 1991).
State v. Moon, 801 P.2d 59 (Kan. Ct. App. 1990).
State v. Sylva, 795 P.2d 947 (Kan. Ct. App. 1990).
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(3)(b) — 1 case
State v. Miller, 790 P.2d 419 (Kan. 1990).
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(4) — 29 cases
State v. Smith, 864 P.2d 1208 (Kan. 1993). “K.S.A. 1992 Supp. 21-4603 is a lengthy statute dealing generally with what dispositions are authorized in criminal cases.”
State v. Cheun-Phon Ji, 872 P.2d 748 (Kan. 1994). “K.S.A. 21-4603 has been amended almost every year since the filing of the Myers opinion.”
State v. Reed, 811 P.2d 1163 (Kan. 1991). “Thus, the law that was in effect on that date, K.S.A. 1989 Supp. 21-4603, applies. Historically, K.”
State v. Bruce, 874 P.2d 1165 (Kan. 1994).
Goddard v. Kansas Dep't of Corr., 824 P.2d 991 (Kan. Ct. App. 1992).
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(4)(a) — 23 cases
State v. Van Winkle, 889 P.2d 749 (Kan. 1995).
State v. Smith, 377 P.3d 414 (Kan. 2016). “21-4603(d)(l) [then K.S.A. 1992 Supp. 21-4603(4)(a)]. In other words, a successful sentence modification on a callback motion might change the necessity for or character of an appeal of the original sentence.”
State v. Huskey, 834 P.2d 1371 (Kan. Ct. App. 1992).
State v. Royse, 845 P.2d 44 (Kan. 1993).
State v. Vanwey, 941 P.2d 365 (Kan. 1997).
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(4)(b) — 4 cases
State v. Hervey, 873 P.2d 188 (Kan. Ct. App. 1994).
State v. Reed, 853 P.2d 50 (Kan. 1993). “*156 The sole issue asserted by the State is whether the district court erred in considering Reed’s second motion to modify his sentence under K.S.A. 1992 Supp. 21-4603 when his first motion, to modify had been denied.”
State v. Waterbury, 907 P.2d 858 (Kan. 1995).
State v. Smith, 843 P.2d 297 (Kan. Ct. App. 1992).
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(5) — 3 cases
Goddard v. Kansas Dep't of Corr., 824 P.2d 991 (Kan. Ct. App. 1992).
Jaben v. Moore, 788 F. Supp. 500 (D. Kan. 1992).
Rajala v. Bowlus Sch. Supply, Inc. (In Re Kirk), 38 B.R. 257 (Bankr. D. Kan. 1984).
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(b) — 5 cases
State v. Burrows, 929 P.2d 1391 (Kan. Ct. App. 1997).
State v. Hawkins, 152 P.3d 85 (Kan. Ct. App. 2007).
Puckett v. Bruce, 73 P.3d 736 (Kan. 2003).
State v. Robards, 78 P.3d 825 (Kan. Ct. App. 2003).
State v. Turner, 919 P.2d 370 (Kan. Ct. App. 1996).
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(b)(3) — 1 case
State v. Loffer, 947 P.2d 458 (Kan. Ct. App. 1997).
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(b)(6) — 1 case
State v. Benoit, 898 P.2d 653 (Kan. Ct. App. 1995).
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(d) — 4 cases
State v. Graham, 30 P.3d 310 (Kan. 2001).
State v. Goseland, 887 P.2d 1109 (Kan. 1994).
State v. Waterbury, 907 P.2d 858 (Kan. 1995).
State v. Moses, 872 P.2d 265 (Kan. 1994).
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(d)(1) — 8 cases
State v. McDaniel, 877 P.2d 961 (Kan. 1994).
State v. McGill, 22 P.3d 597 (Kan. 2001).
State v. Grant, 875 P.2d 986 (Kan. Ct. App. 1994).
State v. Gibbons, 889 P.2d 772 (Kan. 1995).
State v. Robinson, 109 P.3d 185 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006).
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(d)(2) — 5 cases
State v. Gibbons, 889 P.2d 772 (Kan. 1995).
State v. Harris, 942 P.2d 31 (Kan. 1997).
State v. Waterbury, 907 P.2d 858 (Kan. 1995).
State v. Angelo (Kan. 2017).
State v. Sammons, 915 P.2d 788 (Kan. Ct. App. 1996).
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(d)(l) — 12 cases
State v. Smith, 377 P.3d 414 (Kan. 2016). “21-4603(d)(l) [then K.S.A. 1992 Supp. 21-4603(4)(a)]. In other words, a successful sentence modification on a callback motion might change the necessity for or character of an appeal of the original sentence.”
State v. Davis, 883 P.2d 735 (Kan. 1994).
State v. Sims, 887 P.2d 72 (Kan. 1994).
State v. Medina, 887 P.2d 105 (Kan. 1994).
State v. Dotson, 886 P.2d 356 (Kan. 1994).
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(e) — 1 case
State v. Agosto, 27 P.3d 423 (Kan. 2001).
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(f) — 1 case
State v. Benoit, 898 P.2d 653 (Kan. Ct. App. 1995).
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(g) — 1 case
State v. Williams, 125 P.3d 578 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006).
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(j) — 1 case
State v. Medina, 887 P.2d 105 (Kan. 1994).
— K.S.A. § 21-4603(k) — 1 case
State v. Angelo (Kan. 2017).
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.