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

K.S.A. § 21-5225 (2026)

Defense of property other than a dwelling, place of work or occupied vehicle

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

21-5225. Defense of property other than a dwelling, place of work or occupied vehicle. A person who is lawfully in possession of property other than a dwelling, place of work or occupied vehicle is justified in the use of force against another for the purpose of preventing or terminating an unlawful interference with such property. Only such use of force as a reasonable person would deem necessary to prevent or terminate the interference may intentionally be used.

History: L. 2010, ch. 136, § 23; L. 2011, ch. 30, § 9; July 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 2016–2025 · leading case: State v. Collins, 425 P.3d 630 (Kan. Ct. App. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Collins, 425 P.3d 630 (Kan. Ct. App. 2018). “*148 Although not implicated in this case, a person's use of deadly force is presumptively lawful when the person against whom deadly force is being used "(A) is unlawfully or forcefully entering, or has unlawfully or forcefully entered, and is present within, the dwelling,…”
State v. Zongker, 555 P.3d 698 (Kan. 2024). · cites it 3× “K.S.A. 21-5225." K.S.A. 21-5225 provides: "A person who is lawfully in possession of property other than a dwelling, place of work or occupied vehicle is justified in the use of force against another for the purpose of preventing or terminating an unlawful interference with such…”
Kline v. Bergstrom (Kan. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 6× “He asserts that because his and Kline's confrontation concerned the property line outside, the district court should have applied K.S.A. 21-5225 when it considered his immunity motion.”
State v. Hightower (Kan. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 3× “We agree an instruction on defense of property is appropriate for the jury to consider as a defense to criminal threat and criminal restraint when one is trying to obtain his or her property back.”
State v. Chandler (Kan. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 2× “Chandler contends the requested instruction was factually appropriate because the facts presented at trial showed he justifiably used excessive force in defense of his property, as permitted by K.S.A. 21-5225. That statute provides: "A person who is lawfully in possession of…”
State v. Seba (Kan. 2016). “21-5404(a)(2) (referencing K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 21-5222; K.S.A. 2015 Supp.”
State v. Ross (Kan. Ct. App. 2025). “21-5223; K.S.A. 21-5225. We do not have a similar stand-alone statute which justifies the use of force to correct one's child for safeguarding or maintaining discipline, nor does our child abuse statute contain any such language.”
State v. Dozier (Kan. Ct. App. 2025). “K.S.A. 21-5225. Finally, the Legislature made the affirmative defense unavailable to a person who: "(a) Is attempting to commit, committing or escaping from the commission of a forcible felony; "(b) initially provokes the use of any force against such person or another, with the…”
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.