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

K.S.A. § 21-6619 (2026)

Automatic review by and appeal to supreme court

✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KS-LEGkslegislature.org JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

21-6619. Automatic review by and appeal to supreme court. (a) A judgment of conviction resulting in a sentence of death shall be subject to automatic review by and appeal to the supreme court of Kansas in the manner provided by the applicable statutes and rules of the supreme court governing appellate procedure. The review and appeal shall be expedited in every manner consistent with the proper presentation thereof and given priority pursuant to the statutes and rules of the supreme court governing appellate procedure.

(b) The supreme court of Kansas shall consider the question of sentence as well as any errors asserted in the review and appeal and shall be authorized to notice unassigned errors appearing of record if the ends of justice would be served thereby.

(c) With regard to the sentence, the court shall determine:

(1) Whether the sentence of death was imposed under the influence of passion, prejudice or any other arbitrary factor; and

(2) whether the evidence supports the findings that an aggravating circumstance or circumstances existed and that any mitigating circumstances were insufficient to outweigh the aggravating circumstances.

(d) The court shall be authorized to enter such orders as are necessary to effect a proper and complete disposition of the review and appeal.

History: L. 2010, ch. 136, § 259; L. 2011, ch. 30, § 69; July 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 2014–2026 · leading case: State v. Carr, 331 P.3d 544 (Kan. 2014).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Carr, 331 P.3d 544 (Kan. 2014). · cites it 22× “In addition, because this is a death penalty case, this court is empowered to notice and discuss unassigned potential errors under K.S.A. 2013 Supp. 21-6619(b), which we do.”
State v. Kahler, 410 P.3d 105 (Kan. 2018). · cites it 12× “Kahler appeals the capital murder conviction and the ensuing sentence of death; our review is automatic under K.S.A. 2016 Supp. 21-6619. Kahler raises 10 issues on appeal.”
State v. Thurber, 420 P.3d 389 (Kan. 2018). · cites it 7× “21-4627 [b], recodified as K.S.A. 2014 Supp. 21-6619 [b], compels review of any issue raised in defendant's brief, even if not preserved below.”
State v. Robinson, 363 P.3d 875 (Kan. 2015). · cites it 7× “21-4627(b), recodified as K.S.A. 2014 Supp. 21-6619(b), compels review of any issue raised in defendant's brief, even if not preserved below.”
State v. Carr, 502 P.3d 546 (Kan. 2022). · cites it 9× “" K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 21-6619(b); Cheever II, 306 Kan.”
State v. Carr, 502 P.3d 511 (Kan. 2022). · cites it 9× “But while K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 21-6619(b) compels our review of all issues briefed on appeal, it does not require that we treat the record other than as it is presented to us.”
Briggs v. Brown, 400 P.3d 29 (Cal. 2017). “Post-Conviction Remedies § 7; Kan. Stat. Ann. § 21-6619 (a) ; Zimmer v.”
State v. Waldschmidt, 546 P.3d 716 (Kan. 2024). “S.A. 2022 Supp. 21-6619(b) explicitly permits this court in capital cases to notice any "unassigned errors appearing of record if the ends of justice would be served thereby.”
State v. Flack, 541 P.3d 717 (Kan. 2024). · cites it 3× “, demanding to be taken to jail—as an invocation of his right to remain silent rather than the right to counsel. Generally, "[a] party may not object to the introduction of testimony on one ground at trial and assert another ground on appeal.”
State v. Carr, 329 P.3d 1195 (Kan. 2014). “In addition, because this is a death penalty case, this court is empowered to notice and discuss unassigned potential errors under K.S.A. 2013 Supp. 21-6619(b), which we do.”
State v. Kleypas, No. 101724 (Kan. Oct. 21, 2016). · cites it 24× “Therefore, a steadfast rule of finality would be contrary to Kansas law, especially in light of the language of K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 21-6619. Consequently, we hold that the doctrine of res judicata does not apply in this second appeal within the same case.”
State v. Gleason, 388 P.3d 101 (Kan. 2017). · cites it 7× “at 876-77 (holding that although Cheever chose "the wrong procedural vehicle to obtain his requested relief" the issue would be considered because this is a death penalty case and K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 21-6619 applies). Gleason first argues the state law references in our 2014…”
Show all 19 citing cases →
K.S.A. § 21-6619(a): 5 cases
State v. Thurber, 420 P.3d 389 (Kan. 2018). “21-4627 [b], recodified as K.S.A. 2014 Supp. 21-6619 [b], compels review of any issue raised in defendant's brief, even if not preserved below.”
State v. Kleypas, No. 101724 (Kan. Oct. 21, 2016). “Therefore, a steadfast rule of finality would be contrary to Kansas law, especially in light of the language of K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 21-6619. Consequently, we hold that the doctrine of res judicata does not apply in this second appeal within the same case.”
State v. Cheever, No. 99988 (Kan. July 22, 2016).
State v. Cheever - (, No. 99988 (Kan. July 20, 2017).
State v. R. Carr, No. 127850 (Kan. June 26, 2026).
K.S.A. § 21-6619(b): 17 cases
State v. Carr, 331 P.3d 544 (Kan. 2014). “In addition, because this is a death penalty case, this court is empowered to notice and discuss unassigned potential errors under K.S.A. 2013 Supp. 21-6619(b), which we do.”
State v. Thurber, 420 P.3d 389 (Kan. 2018). “21-4627 [b], recodified as K.S.A. 2014 Supp. 21-6619 [b], compels review of any issue raised in defendant's brief, even if not preserved below.”
State v. Robinson, 363 P.3d 875 (Kan. 2015). “21-4627(b), recodified as K.S.A. 2014 Supp. 21-6619(b), compels review of any issue raised in defendant's brief, even if not preserved below.”
State v. Kahler, 410 P.3d 105 (Kan. 2018). “Kahler appeals the capital murder conviction and the ensuing sentence of death; our review is automatic under K.S.A. 2016 Supp. 21-6619. Kahler raises 10 issues on appeal.”
State v. Carr, 502 P.3d 546 (Kan. 2022). “" K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 21-6619(b); Cheever II, 306 Kan.”
K.S.A. § 21-6619(c): 2 cases
State v. Gleason, 388 P.3d 101 (Kan. 2017). “at 876-77 (holding that although Cheever chose "the wrong procedural vehicle to obtain his requested relief" the issue would be considered because this is a death penalty case and K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 21-6619 applies). Gleason first argues the state law references in our 2014…”
State v. Kleypas, No. 101724 (Kan. Oct. 21, 2016). “Therefore, a steadfast rule of finality would be contrary to Kansas law, especially in light of the language of K.S.A. 2015 Supp. 21-6619. Consequently, we hold that the doctrine of res judicata does not apply in this second appeal within the same case.”
K.S.A. § 21-6619(c)(1): 8 cases
State v. Carr, 502 P.3d 546 (Kan. 2022). “" K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 21-6619(b); Cheever II, 306 Kan.”
State v. Carr, 502 P.3d 511 (Kan. 2022). “But while K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 21-6619(b) compels our review of all issues briefed on appeal, it does not require that we treat the record other than as it is presented to us.”
State v. Carr, 331 P.3d 544 (Kan. 2014). “In addition, because this is a death penalty case, this court is empowered to notice and discuss unassigned potential errors under K.S.A. 2013 Supp. 21-6619(b), which we do.”
State v. Robinson, 363 P.3d 875 (Kan. 2015). “21-4627(b), recodified as K.S.A. 2014 Supp. 21-6619(b), compels review of any issue raised in defendant's brief, even if not preserved below.”
State v. Flack, 541 P.3d 717 (Kan. 2024). “, demanding to be taken to jail—as an invocation of his right to remain silent rather than the right to counsel. Generally, "[a] party may not object to the introduction of testimony on one ground at trial and assert another ground on appeal.”
K.S.A. § 21-6619(c)(2): 4 cases
State v. Kahler, 410 P.3d 105 (Kan. 2018). “Kahler appeals the capital murder conviction and the ensuing sentence of death; our review is automatic under K.S.A. 2016 Supp. 21-6619. Kahler raises 10 issues on appeal.”
State v. Carr, 502 P.3d 546 (Kan. 2022). “" K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 21-6619(b); Cheever II, 306 Kan.”
State v. Carr, 502 P.3d 511 (Kan. 2022). “But while K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 21-6619(b) compels our review of all issues briefed on appeal, it does not require that we treat the record other than as it is presented to us.”
State v. Gleason, 329 P.3d 1102 (Kan. 2014).
K.S.A. § 21-6619(c)(l): 1 case
State v. Robinson, 363 P.3d 875 (Kan. 2015). “21-4627(b), recodified as K.S.A. 2014 Supp. 21-6619(b), compels review of any issue raised in defendant's brief, even if not preserved below.”
K.S.A. § 21-6619(d): 3 cases
State v. Cheever, No. 99988 (Kan. July 22, 2016).
State v. Cheever - (, No. 99988 (Kan. July 20, 2017).
State v. R. Carr, No. 127850 (Kan. June 26, 2026).
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.