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

K.S.A. § 21-4716 (2026)

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

21-4716.

History: L. 1992, ch. 239, § 16; L. 1993, ch. 291, § 263; L. 1994, ch. 341, § 2; L. 1996, ch. 258, § 12; L. 2000, ch. 181, § 9; L. 2002, ch. 170, § 1; L. 2006, ch. 194, § 13; Repealed, L. 2010, ch. 136, § 307; July 1, 2011.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 183 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1994–2024 · leading case: State v. Gould, 23 P.3d 801 (Kan. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Gould, 23 P.3d 801 (Kan. 2001). · cites it 32× “The State moved for an upward departure sentence under K.S.A. 2000 Supp. 21-4716 citing as reasons: (1) the victims were Gould's children; (2) the abuse of L.”
State v. Carr, 53 P.3d 843 (Kan. 2002). · cites it 22× “Carr was arrested on November 23, 1999, 26 days after his release from the Youth Center in Topeka, where he had served a sentence arising from a juvenile adjudication on drug charges.”
State v. Gideon, 894 P.2d 850 (Kan. 1995). · cites it 13× “That appropriate aggravators other than those mentioned in K.S.A. 1993 Supp. 21-4716(b)(2) can be considered is of significance in this case.”
State v. Sampsel, 997 P.2d 664 (Kan. 2000). · cites it 24× “" K.S.A. 1998 Supp. 21-4716 further provides: "(c) In determining aggravating or mitigating circumstances, the court shall consider: (1) Any evidence received during the proceeding, (2) the presentence report; (3) written briefs and oral arguments of either the state or counsel…”
State v. Martin, 112 P.3d 192 (Kan. 2005). · cites it 20× “21-4716[c][1][B]) and not specifically including a ringleader role in the criminal enterprise as constituting an aggravating factor (K.S.A. 2004 Supp. 21-4716[c][2]), the legislature did not intend *633 to authorize an upward departure based on greater culpability due to a…”
State v. Spencer, 248 P.3d 256 (Kan. 2011). · cites it 17× “In contrast, it argues, appellate review of a sentencing judge's performance under K.S.A. 21-4716 requires it to first examine the record to discern whether substantial competent evidence supports the articulated reasons for the departure.”
State v. Martin, 175 P.3d 832 (Kan. 2008). · cites it 10× “The sole issue on appeal is whether the district court’s reasons, despite not being listed in K.S.A. 2005 Supp. 21-4716, are nevertheless substantial and compelling as required by that statute.”
State v. Favela, 911 P.2d 792 (Kan. 1996). · cites it 11× “The sentencing court merely exercised its power of sentencing under K.S.A. 1994 Supp. 21-4716, which grants the sentencing judge the right to depart from a presumptive sentence.”
Cunningham v. California, 549 U.S. 270 (2007). · cites it 2× “2006); Kan. Stat. Ann. §§21-4716 (b), 21-4718(b) (2005 Supp.”
State v. Johnson, 190 P.3d 207 (Kan. 2008). · cites it 4× “Examining the facts, the Gould court found that “Gould’s juiy verdict ‘authorized’ a sentence of 31 to 34 months for each child abuse conviction.”
State v. Blackmon, 176 P.3d 160 (Kan. 2008). · cites it 7× “The sentencing court merely exercised its power of sentencing under K.S.A. 1994 Supp. 21-4716, which grants the sentencing judge the right to depart from a presumptive sentence.”
State v. Cox, 908 P.2d 603 (Kan. 1995). · cites it 9× “” As required by K.S.A. 1993 Supp. 21-4716(a), the trial court stated on the record what it considered the substantial and compelling reason for departure to be, the brutal nature of the killing.”
Show all 183 citing cases →
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(2) — 1 case
State v. Tiffany, 986 P.2d 1064 (Kan. 1999).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(B)(2)(F)(ii) — 1 case
State v. Spinden, 54 P.3d 514 (Kan. Ct. App. 2002).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(a) — 63 cases
State v. Gould, 23 P.3d 801 (Kan. 2001). “The State moved for an upward departure sentence under K.S.A. 2000 Supp. 21-4716 citing as reasons: (1) the victims were Gould's children; (2) the abuse of L.”
State v. Johnson, 190 P.3d 207 (Kan. 2008). “Examining the facts, the Gould court found that “Gould’s juiy verdict ‘authorized’ a sentence of 31 to 34 months for each child abuse conviction.”
State v. Blackmon, 176 P.3d 160 (Kan. 2008). “The sentencing court merely exercised its power of sentencing under K.S.A. 1994 Supp. 21-4716, which grants the sentencing judge the right to depart from a presumptive sentence.”
State v. Reed, 352 P.3d 530 (Kan. 2015).
State v. Carr, 53 P.3d 843 (Kan. 2002). “Carr was arrested on November 23, 1999, 26 days after his release from the Youth Center in Topeka, where he had served a sentence arising from a juvenile adjudication on drug charges.”
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(b) — 10 cases
State v. Gould, 23 P.3d 801 (Kan. 2001). “The State moved for an upward departure sentence under K.S.A. 2000 Supp. 21-4716 citing as reasons: (1) the victims were Gould's children; (2) the abuse of L.”
State v. Carr, 53 P.3d 843 (Kan. 2002). “Carr was arrested on November 23, 1999, 26 days after his release from the Youth Center in Topeka, where he had served a sentence arising from a juvenile adjudication on drug charges.”
State v. Schad, 206 P.3d 22 (Kan. Ct. App. 2009).
State v. Horn, 238 P.3d 238 (Kan. 2010).
State v. Huerta, 247 P.3d 1043 (Kan. 2011).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(b)(1) — 7 cases
State v. Favela, 911 P.2d 792 (Kan. 1996). “The sentencing court merely exercised its power of sentencing under K.S.A. 1994 Supp. 21-4716, which grants the sentencing judge the right to depart from a presumptive sentence.”
State v. Minor, 997 P.2d 648 (Kan. 2000).
State v. Sampsel, 997 P.2d 664 (Kan. 2000). “" K.S.A. 1998 Supp. 21-4716 further provides: "(c) In determining aggravating or mitigating circumstances, the court shall consider: (1) Any evidence received during the proceeding, (2) the presentence report; (3) written briefs and oral arguments of either the state or counsel…”
State v. Alderson, 922 P.2d 435 (Kan. 1996).
State v. Favela, 898 P.2d 1165 (Kan. Ct. App. 1995).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(b)(1)(A) — 4 cases
State v. Sampsel, 997 P.2d 664 (Kan. 2000). “" K.S.A. 1998 Supp. 21-4716 further provides: "(c) In determining aggravating or mitigating circumstances, the court shall consider: (1) Any evidence received during the proceeding, (2) the presentence report; (3) written briefs and oral arguments of either the state or counsel…”
State v. Minor, 997 P.2d 648 (Kan. 2000).
State v. Favela, 911 P.2d 792 (Kan. 1996). “The sentencing court merely exercised its power of sentencing under K.S.A. 1994 Supp. 21-4716, which grants the sentencing judge the right to depart from a presumptive sentence.”
State v. Grady, 900 P.2d 227 (Kan. 1995).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(b)(1)(B) — 1 case
State v. Minor, 997 P.2d 648 (Kan. 2000).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(b)(1)(E) — 5 cases
State v. Minor, 997 P.2d 648 (Kan. 2000).
State v. Favela, 911 P.2d 792 (Kan. 1996). “The sentencing court merely exercised its power of sentencing under K.S.A. 1994 Supp. 21-4716, which grants the sentencing judge the right to depart from a presumptive sentence.”
State v. Hines, 294 P.3d 270 (Kan. 2013).
State v. Sampsel, 997 P.2d 664 (Kan. 2000). “" K.S.A. 1998 Supp. 21-4716 further provides: "(c) In determining aggravating or mitigating circumstances, the court shall consider: (1) Any evidence received during the proceeding, (2) the presentence report; (3) written briefs and oral arguments of either the state or counsel…”
State v. Gibson, 457 P.3d 207 (Kan. Ct. App. 2019).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(b)(13) — 1 case
State v. Valentine, 921 P.2d 770 (Kan. 1996).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(b)(2) — 20 cases
State v. Gould, 23 P.3d 801 (Kan. 2001). “The State moved for an upward departure sentence under K.S.A. 2000 Supp. 21-4716 citing as reasons: (1) the victims were Gould's children; (2) the abuse of L.”
State v. Gideon, 894 P.2d 850 (Kan. 1995). “That appropriate aggravators other than those mentioned in K.S.A. 1993 Supp. 21-4716(b)(2) can be considered is of significance in this case.”
State v. McKay, 26 P.3d 58 (Kan. 2001).
State v. Miller, 926 P.2d 652 (Kan. 1996).
State v. Bailey, 952 P.2d 1289 (Kan. 1998).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(b)(2)(A) — 9 cases
State v. Gould, 23 P.3d 801 (Kan. 2001). “The State moved for an upward departure sentence under K.S.A. 2000 Supp. 21-4716 citing as reasons: (1) the victims were Gould's children; (2) the abuse of L.”
State v. Martin, 112 P.3d 192 (Kan. 2005). “21-4716[c][1][B]) and not specifically including a ringleader role in the criminal enterprise as constituting an aggravating factor (K.S.A. 2004 Supp. 21-4716[c][2]), the legislature did not intend *633 to authorize an upward departure based on greater culpability due to a…”
State v. Murphy, 19 P.3d 80 (Kan. 2001).
State v. Favela, 911 P.2d 792 (Kan. 1996). “The sentencing court merely exercised its power of sentencing under K.S.A. 1994 Supp. 21-4716, which grants the sentencing judge the right to depart from a presumptive sentence.”
State v. Schad, 206 P.3d 22 (Kan. Ct. App. 2009).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(b)(2)(B) — 9 cases
State v. Cox, 908 P.2d 603 (Kan. 1995). “” As required by K.S.A. 1993 Supp. 21-4716(a), the trial court stated on the record what it considered the substantial and compelling reason for departure to be, the brutal nature of the killing.”
State v. Jackson, 936 P.2d 761 (Kan. 1997).
State v. Valentine, 921 P.2d 770 (Kan. 1996).
State v. Eisele, 936 P.2d 742 (Kan. 1997).
State v. Spain, 953 P.2d 1004 (Kan. 1998).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(b)(2)(D) — 4 cases
State v. Gould, 23 P.3d 801 (Kan. 2001). “The State moved for an upward departure sentence under K.S.A. 2000 Supp. 21-4716 citing as reasons: (1) the victims were Gould's children; (2) the abuse of L.”
State v. Ippert, 995 P.2d 858 (Kan. 2000).
State v. Gideon, 894 P.2d 850 (Kan. 1995). “That appropriate aggravators other than those mentioned in K.S.A. 1993 Supp. 21-4716(b)(2) can be considered is of significance in this case.”
State v. Sprinkle, 59 P.3d 1039 (Kan. Ct. App. 2002).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(b)(2)(F) — 3 cases
State v. Taylor, 998 P.2d 123 (Kan. Ct. App. 2000).
State v. Spinden, 54 P.3d 514 (Kan. Ct. App. 2002).
State v. McClennon, 45 P.3d 848 (Kan. 2002).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(b)(2)(F)(i) — 2 cases
State v. Spinden, 54 P.3d 514 (Kan. Ct. App. 2002).
State v. McClennon, 45 P.3d 848 (Kan. 2002).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(b)(2)(F)(ii) — 4 cases
State v. Taylor, 998 P.2d 123 (Kan. Ct. App. 2000).
State v. Zabrinas, 24 P.3d 77 (Kan. 2001).
State v. Armstrong, 33 P.3d 246 (Kan. Ct. App. 2001).
State v. McClennon, 45 P.3d 848 (Kan. 2002).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(b)(2)(G) — 2 cases
State v. Tiffany, 986 P.2d 1064 (Kan. 1999).
State v. Salcido-Corral, 940 P.2d 11 (Kan. 1997).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(b)(2)(G)(i) — 1 case
State v. Tiffany, 986 P.2d 1064 (Kan. 1999).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(b)(2)(G)(ii) — 2 cases
State v. Gideon, 894 P.2d 850 (Kan. 1995). “That appropriate aggravators other than those mentioned in K.S.A. 1993 Supp. 21-4716(b)(2) can be considered is of significance in this case.”
State v. Tiffany, 986 P.2d 1064 (Kan. 1999).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(b)(3) — 10 cases
State v. Gould, 23 P.3d 801 (Kan. 2001). “The State moved for an upward departure sentence under K.S.A. 2000 Supp. 21-4716 citing as reasons: (1) the victims were Gould's children; (2) the abuse of L.”
State v. Gideon, 894 P.2d 850 (Kan. 1995). “That appropriate aggravators other than those mentioned in K.S.A. 1993 Supp. 21-4716(b)(2) can be considered is of significance in this case.”
State v. Grady, 900 P.2d 227 (Kan. 1995).
State v. Salcido-Corral, 940 P.2d 11 (Kan. 1997).
State v. Brady, 929 P.2d 132 (Kan. 1996).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(b)(l) — 6 cases
State v. Murphy, 19 P.3d 80 (Kan. 2001).
State v. Miller, 926 P.2d 652 (Kan. 1996).
State v. Richardson, 901 P.2d 1 (Kan. Ct. App. 1995).
State v. Favela, 898 P.2d 1165 (Kan. Ct. App. 1995).
State v. Bost, 903 P.2d 160 (Kan. Ct. App. 1995).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(b)(l)(A) — 3 cases
State v. Blackmon, 176 P.3d 160 (Kan. 2008). “The sentencing court merely exercised its power of sentencing under K.S.A. 1994 Supp. 21-4716, which grants the sentencing judge the right to depart from a presumptive sentence.”
State v. Martin, 175 P.3d 832 (Kan. 2008). “The sole issue on appeal is whether the district court’s reasons, despite not being listed in K.S.A. 2005 Supp. 21-4716, are nevertheless substantial and compelling as required by that statute.”
State v. Rush, 942 P.2d 55 (Kan. Ct. App. 1997).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(b)(l)(E) — 2 cases
State v. Blackmon, 176 P.3d 160 (Kan. 2008). “The sentencing court merely exercised its power of sentencing under K.S.A. 1994 Supp. 21-4716, which grants the sentencing judge the right to depart from a presumptive sentence.”
State v. Sewell, 971 P.2d 1201 (Kan. Ct. App. 1998).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(c) — 16 cases
State v. Reed, 352 P.3d 530 (Kan. 2015).
State v. Blackmon, 176 P.3d 160 (Kan. 2008). “The sentencing court merely exercised its power of sentencing under K.S.A. 1994 Supp. 21-4716, which grants the sentencing judge the right to depart from a presumptive sentence.”
State v. Martin, 112 P.3d 192 (Kan. 2005). “21-4716[c][1][B]) and not specifically including a ringleader role in the criminal enterprise as constituting an aggravating factor (K.S.A. 2004 Supp. 21-4716[c][2]), the legislature did not intend *633 to authorize an upward departure based on greater culpability due to a…”
State v. Bird, 312 P.3d 1265 (Kan. 2013).
State v. Sampsel, 997 P.2d 664 (Kan. 2000). “" K.S.A. 1998 Supp. 21-4716 further provides: "(c) In determining aggravating or mitigating circumstances, the court shall consider: (1) Any evidence received during the proceeding, (2) the presentence report; (3) written briefs and oral arguments of either the state or counsel…”
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(c)(1) — 9 cases
State v. Ortega-Cadelan, 194 P.3d 1195 (Kan. 2008).
State v. Spencer, 248 P.3d 256 (Kan. 2011). “In contrast, it argues, appellate review of a sentencing judge's performance under K.S.A. 21-4716 requires it to first examine the record to discern whether substantial competent evidence supports the articulated reasons for the departure.”
State v. Gracey, 200 P.3d 1275 (Kan. 2009).
State v. Martin, 112 P.3d 192 (Kan. 2005). “21-4716[c][1][B]) and not specifically including a ringleader role in the criminal enterprise as constituting an aggravating factor (K.S.A. 2004 Supp. 21-4716[c][2]), the legislature did not intend *633 to authorize an upward departure based on greater culpability due to a…”
State v. Martin, 87 P.3d 337 (Kan. Ct. App. 2004).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(c)(1)(A) — 4 cases
State v. Thomas, 198 P.3d 203 (Kan. Ct. App. 2009).
State v. Spencer, 248 P.3d 256 (Kan. 2011). “In contrast, it argues, appellate review of a sentencing judge's performance under K.S.A. 21-4716 requires it to first examine the record to discern whether substantial competent evidence supports the articulated reasons for the departure.”
State v. Theurer, 337 P.3d 725 (Kan. Ct. App. 2014).
State v. Bolden, 132 P.3d 981 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(c)(1)(B) — 2 cases
State v. Martin, 112 P.3d 192 (Kan. 2005). “21-4716[c][1][B]) and not specifically including a ringleader role in the criminal enterprise as constituting an aggravating factor (K.S.A. 2004 Supp. 21-4716[c][2]), the legislature did not intend *633 to authorize an upward departure based on greater culpability due to a…”
State v. Gibson, 457 P.3d 207 (Kan. Ct. App. 2019).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(c)(1)(E) — 1 case
State v. Spencer, 248 P.3d 256 (Kan. 2011). “In contrast, it argues, appellate review of a sentencing judge's performance under K.S.A. 21-4716 requires it to first examine the record to discern whether substantial competent evidence supports the articulated reasons for the departure.”
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(c)(2) — 13 cases
State v. Martin, 87 P.3d 337 (Kan. Ct. App. 2004).
State v. Snow, 144 P.3d 729 (Kan. 2006).
State v. Martin, 112 P.3d 192 (Kan. 2005). “21-4716[c][1][B]) and not specifically including a ringleader role in the criminal enterprise as constituting an aggravating factor (K.S.A. 2004 Supp. 21-4716[c][2]), the legislature did not intend *633 to authorize an upward departure based on greater culpability due to a…”
In re L.M., 186 P.3d 164 (Kan. 2008).
State v. Snow, 195 P.3d 282 (Kan. Ct. App. 2008).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(c)(2)(A) — 1 case
State v. Neri, 95 P.3d 121 (Kan. Ct. App. 2004).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(c)(2)(C) — 1 case
State v. Stawski, 271 P.3d 1282 (Kan. Ct. App. 2012).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(c)(2)(D) — 4 cases
State v. Martin, 175 P.3d 832 (Kan. 2008). “The sole issue on appeal is whether the district court’s reasons, despite not being listed in K.S.A. 2005 Supp. 21-4716, are nevertheless substantial and compelling as required by that statute.”
State v. Horn, 238 P.3d 238 (Kan. 2010).
State v. Bryant, 191 P.3d 350 (Kan. Ct. App. 2008).
State v. Horn, 196 P.3d 379 (Kan. Ct. App. 2008).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(c)(2)(F)(i) — 2 cases
State v. Newcomb, 298 P.3d 285 (Kan. 2013).
State v. Ochs, 306 P.3d 294 (Kan. 2013).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(c)(3) — 3 cases
State v. Martin, 112 P.3d 192 (Kan. 2005). “21-4716[c][1][B]) and not specifically including a ringleader role in the criminal enterprise as constituting an aggravating factor (K.S.A. 2004 Supp. 21-4716[c][2]), the legislature did not intend *633 to authorize an upward departure based on greater culpability due to a…”
State v. Martin, 175 P.3d 832 (Kan. 2008). “The sole issue on appeal is whether the district court’s reasons, despite not being listed in K.S.A. 2005 Supp. 21-4716, are nevertheless substantial and compelling as required by that statute.”
State v. Favela, 911 P.2d 792 (Kan. 1996). “The sentencing court merely exercised its power of sentencing under K.S.A. 1994 Supp. 21-4716, which grants the sentencing judge the right to depart from a presumptive sentence.”
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(c)(l) — 9 cases
State v. Randolph, 301 P.3d 300 (Kan. 2013).
State v. Ortega-Cadelan, 194 P.3d 1195 (Kan. 2008).
State v. Jolly, 342 P.3d 935 (Kan. 2015).
State v. Haney, 116 P.3d 747 (Kan. Ct. App. 2005).
State v. Ussery, 116 P.3d 735 (Kan. Ct. App. 2005).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(c)(l)(A) — 2 cases
State v. Haney, 116 P.3d 747 (Kan. Ct. App. 2005).
State v. Ussery, 116 P.3d 735 (Kan. Ct. App. 2005).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(c)(l)(B) — 3 cases
State v. Martin, 175 P.3d 832 (Kan. 2008). “The sole issue on appeal is whether the district court’s reasons, despite not being listed in K.S.A. 2005 Supp. 21-4716, are nevertheless substantial and compelling as required by that statute.”
State v. Haney, 116 P.3d 747 (Kan. Ct. App. 2005).
State v. Ussery, 116 P.3d 735 (Kan. Ct. App. 2005).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(c)(l)(C) — 3 cases
State v. Ussery, 116 P.3d 735 (Kan. Ct. App. 2005).
State v. Haney, 116 P.3d 747 (Kan. Ct. App. 2005).
State v. Cato-Perry, 332 P.3d 191 (Kan. Ct. App. 2014).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(c)(l)(E) — 3 cases
State v. Warren, 304 P.3d 1288 (Kan. 2013).
State v. Dillon, 244 P.3d 680 (Kan. Ct. App. 2010).
State v. Warren, 270 P.3d 13 (Kan. Ct. App. 2012).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(d) — 3 cases
State v. Hines, 294 P.3d 270 (Kan. 2013).
State v. Theurer, 337 P.3d 725 (Kan. Ct. App. 2014).
State v. Horn, 196 P.3d 379 (Kan. Ct. App. 2008).
— K.S.A. § 21-4716(d)(4) — 1 case
State v. Easterling, 213 P.3d 418 (Kan. 2009).
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.