Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 21-4626 (2026)

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

21-4626.

History: L. 1990, ch. 99, § 6; L. 1998, ch. 185, § 2; Repealed, L. 2010, ch. 136, § 307; July 1, 2011.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 14 cases, 1992–2018 · leading case: State v. Gideon, 894 P.2d 850 (Kan. 1995).
State v. Gideon, 894 P.2d 850 (Kan. 1995). · cites it 4× “K.S.A. 1993 Supp. 21-4624(5). K.S.A. 1993 Supp.”
State v. Marsh, 102 P.3d 445 (Kan. 2004). · cites it 2× “A nonexclusive list of mitigating circumstances that a defendant may present to the jury are set out in K.S.A. 2003 Supp. 21-4626: "(1) The defendant has no significant history of prior criminal activity.”
State v. Thurber, 420 P.3d 389 (Kan. 2018). “1 GPA; (4) Thurber's failure to argue he was substantially impaired from appreciating the criminality of his conduct or from conforming his conduct to the requirements of law as a mitigator under K.S.A. 21-4626(6) ; (5) evidence Thurber communicated effectively with law…”
State v. Bailey, 834 P.2d 342 (Kan. 1992). · cites it 2× “2, 5, and 6 to be present herein, and that they were not outweighed by the mitigating factors set forth in K.S.A. 1991 Supp. 21-4626. The challenge in this issue is limited to aggravating factors Nos.”
State v. Carr, 331 P.3d 544 (Kan. 2014). “Carr argues that the exact length of his sentences if no death penalty were imposed had to be shared with the jury under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments and Section 9 of the Kansas Constitution Rill of Rights, because the length of the sentences qualified as mitigating.”
State v. Jolly, 342 P.3d 935 (Kan. 2015). “21-4716(c)(l) and (c)(2) (nonexclusive list of aggravating and mitigating factors to consider when considering departure from presumptive sentence under Kansas Sentencing Guidelines Act [KSGA]); see also sentencing for capital crimes K.”
State v. Hickles, 929 P.2d 141 (Kan. 1996). · cites it 2× “Hicldes argues that the mandatoiy language of K.S.A. 21-4626 required the trial cpurt to consider this mitigating factor and that the trial court erred by holding that no mitigating factors had been established.”
State v. Phillips, 850 P.2d 877 (Kan. 1993). · cites it 2× “” K.S.A. 1992 Supp. 21-4625 sets forth eight aggravating circumstances that may be considered by the jury.”
State v. Gleason, 329 P.3d 1102 (Kan. 2014). “See K.S.A. 21-4626 (providing nonexclusive list of mitigating circumstances).”
State v. Follin, 947 P.2d 8 (Kan. 1997). “” K.S.A. 1993 Supp. 21-4626. *48 Defendant states that there was undisputed evidence of both.”
State v. Walker, 845 P.2d 1 (Kan. 1993). “K.S.A. 1991 Supp. 21-4626 provides: *305 “Mitigating circumstances shall include, but are not limited to, the following: “(1) The defendant has no significant history of prior criminal activity.”
State v. Harmon, 865 P.2d 1011 (Kan. 1993). “” K.S.A. 1992 Supp. 21-4624(2). On remand, the proceeding is to be conducted in accordance with the provisions of K.”
— K.S.A. § 21-4626(2) — 1 case
State v. Gideon, 894 P.2d 850 (Kan. 1995). “K.S.A. 1993 Supp. 21-4624(5). K.S.A. 1993 Supp.”
— K.S.A. § 21-4626(3) — 1 case
State v. Hickles, 929 P.2d 141 (Kan. 1996). “Hicldes argues that the mandatoiy language of K.S.A. 21-4626 required the trial cpurt to consider this mitigating factor and that the trial court erred by holding that no mitigating factors had been established.”
— K.S.A. § 21-4626(5) — 1 case
State v. Gideon, 894 P.2d 850 (Kan. 1995). “K.S.A. 1993 Supp. 21-4624(5). K.S.A. 1993 Supp.”
— K.S.A. § 21-4626(6) — 2 cases
State v. Thurber, 420 P.3d 389 (Kan. 2018). “1 GPA; (4) Thurber's failure to argue he was substantially impaired from appreciating the criminality of his conduct or from conforming his conduct to the requirements of law as a mitigator under K.S.A. 21-4626(6) ; (5) evidence Thurber communicated effectively with law…”
State v. Gideon, 894 P.2d 850 (Kan. 1995). “K.S.A. 1993 Supp. 21-4624(5). K.S.A. 1993 Supp.”
— K.S.A. § 21-4626(9) — 1 case
State v. Carr, 331 P.3d 544 (Kan. 2014). “Carr argues that the exact length of his sentences if no death penalty were imposed had to be shared with the jury under the Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments and Section 9 of the Kansas Constitution Rill of Rights, because the length of the sentences qualified as mitigating.”
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.