K.S.A. » Chapter 22
Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 22-2807 (2026)

Forfeiture of appearance bonds; warrant for arrest; forfeiture set aside; procedure after entry of judgement

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

22-2807. Forfeiture of appearance bonds; warrant for arrest; forfeiture set aside; procedure after entry of judgement. (a) If a defendant fails to appear as directed by the court and guaranteed by an appearance bond, the court in which the bond is deposited shall declare a forfeiture of the bail and issue a warrant for the defendant's arrest. If the defendant is charged with a felony offense, the sheriff shall enter such warrant into the national crime information center's index within 14 days of issuance of the warrant and, upon request, the court shall make a copy of the warrant available to a compensated surety who deposited the bond on behalf of the defendant.

(b) An appearance bond may only be forfeited by the court upon a failure to appear. If a defendant violates any other condition of bond, the bond may be revoked and the defendant remanded to custody. An appearance bond is revoked by the execution of a warrant for a defendant's arrest for a violation of a bond condition. The magistrate shall promptly set a new bond pursuant to requirements of K.S.A. 22-2802, and amendments thereto.

(c) (1) The court may direct that a forfeiture be set aside, upon such conditions as the court may impose, if it appears that justice does not require the enforcement of the forfeiture.

(2) The court shall direct that a forfeiture be set aside if:

(A) The surety can prove that the defendant is incarcerated somewhere within the United States prior to judgment of default by providing to the court a written statement, signed by the surety under penalty of perjury, setting forth the facts substantiating such incarceration;

(B) the warrant required to be issued by subsection (a) was not issued within 14 days of the forfeiture;

(C) a warrant that is required to be entered into the national crime information center's index pursuant to subsection (a) was not entered within 14 days of issuance or provided by the court to the surety upon request pursuant to subsection (a), unless there is good cause shown for the failure to enter such warrant into the index or provide such warrant to the compensated surety;

(D) the prosecuting attorney has declined to proceed with extradition; or

(E) the defendant was not held subject to an immigration detainer when the bond was posted and the surety can prove that the defendant has been deported from the United States prior to judgment of default by providing to the court a written statement, signed by the surety under penalty of perjury, setting forth the facts substantiating the deportation.

(3) Upon the defendant's return, the surety may be ordered to pay the costs of such return.

(d) When a forfeiture has not been set aside, the court shall on motion enter a judgment of default and execution may issue thereon. If the forfeiture has been decreed by a district magistrate judge and the amount of the bond exceeds the limits of the civil jurisdiction prescribed by law for a district magistrate judge, the judge shall notify the chief judge in writing of the forfeiture and the matter shall be assigned to a district judge who, on motion, shall enter a judgment of default. By entering into a bond the obligors submit to the jurisdiction of any court having power to enter judgment upon default and irrevocably appoint the clerk of that court as their agent upon whom any papers affecting their liability may be served. Their liability may be enforced on motion without the necessity of an independent action. The motion and notice thereof may be served on the clerk of the court, who shall promptly mail copies to the obligors to their last known addresses. No judgment may be entered against the obligor in an appearance bond until more than 60 days after notice is served as provided in this section. No judgment may be entered against the obligor in an appearance bond more than two years after a defendant's failure to appear.

(e) After entry of judgment pursuant to subsection (d), the court:

(1) May remit such judgment in whole or in part under the conditions applying to the setting aside of forfeiture in subsection (c); and

(2) shall remit a portion of the amount of the appearance bond to the obligor if the defendant is returned to custody within the following number of days after judgment is entered, as follows:

(A) 90% if the defendant is returned to custody within 90 days;

(B) 75% if the defendant is returned to custody within 91 to 180 days; and

(C) 50% if the defendant is returned to custody within 181 to 270 days.

History: L. 1970, ch. 129, § 22-2807; L. 1976, ch. 163, § 9; L. 1977, ch. 109, § 17; L. 1986, ch. 115, § 58; L. 1999, ch. 57, § 30; L. 2007, ch. 145, § 5; L. 2010, ch. 132, § 1; L. 2022, ch. 76, § 4; L. 2025, ch. 120, § 8; July 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1979–2021 · leading case: State v. Rodgers, 589 P.2d 981 (Kan. 1979).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Rodgers, 589 P.2d 981 (Kan. 1979). · cites it 6× “K.S.A. 1977 Supp. 22-2807 (1) authorizes the court in which the bond is deposited to declare a forfeiture of the bail if there is a breach of a condition in the appearance bond.”
State v. Buckle, 604 P.2d 743 (Kan. Ct. App. 1979). · cites it 3× “Under the present code of criminal procedure bond forfeitures are governed by K.S.A. 1979 Supp. 22-2807. Its terms were aptly summarized in State v.”
State v. Diaz, 241 P.3d 1018 (Kan. Ct. App. 2010). “” K.S.A. 22-2807(1), (2). On appeal, Diaz contends that he did not have the required mental state for the offense — willfulness—because he was operating under a mistake of fact, the mistake being Gilman’s advice that Diaz didn’t need to attend the hearing because Gilman would…”
State v. Marble, 901 P.2d 521 (Kan. Ct. App. 1995). “K.S.A. 22-2807(1). These conditions might include restrictions on travel, association, place of abode, or “any other condition deemed reasonably necessary to assure appearance as required.”
State v. Indem. Ins. Co. of North Am., 672 P.2d 251 (Kan. Ct. App. 1983). “The agent was not even aware of the identity of the attorney appointed for Davis on October 5, 1981, until sometime after the bond was forfeited in March, 1982.”
State v. Sedam, 122 P.3d 829 (Kan. Ct. App. 2005). “Warfield argues that he is not responsible for this bond forfeiture because the conditions of the bond had been changed and there was no notice to him of the reinstatement of the bond. The State argues that reinstatement of Sedam’s bond did not prejudice War-field in any way and…”
State v. Mottolese, 2015 VT 81 (Vt. 2015). “§ 27-10-2-12 (b)(2)(A)(ii)); Kansas ( Kan. Stat. Ann. § 22-2807 (3)); Louisiana (State v.”
State v. Chappell, 729 P.2d 1241 (Kan. Ct. App. 1986). “21-3814 the State is not required to notify the defendant of the forfeiture of the appearance bond as provided in K.S.A. 1977 Supp. 22-2807 in order to establish the element of willfulness in 21-3814.”
State v. Mottolese, 199 Vt. 470 (Vt. 2015). “§ 27-10-2-12 (b)(2)(A)(ii)); Kansas ( Kan. Stat. Ann. § 22-2807 (3)); Louisiana ( State v.”
State v. Rodriguez (Kan. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 5× “If a defendant violates an appearance bond, the district court may revoke the bond as provided in K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 22-2807. If a defendant fails to appear, the district court may immediately forfeit the bond.”
State v. Jones, 173 P.3d 1179 (Kan. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 6× “Jones contends that the district court merely revoked Jones’ bond and that recent amendments to K.S.A. 2006 Supp. 22-2807 indicate that the Kansas Legislature distinguishes between the revocation of a bond and the forfeiture of a bond.”
State v. Mottolese, 199 Vt. 470 (Vt. 2015). “§ 27-10-2-12 (b)(2)(A)(ii)); Kansas ( Kan. Stat. Ann. § 22-2807 (3)); Louisiana ( State v.”
— K.S.A. § 22-2807(1) — 4 cases
State v. Diaz, 241 P.3d 1018 (Kan. Ct. App. 2010). “” K.S.A. 22-2807(1), (2). On appeal, Diaz contends that he did not have the required mental state for the offense — willfulness—because he was operating under a mistake of fact, the mistake being Gilman’s advice that Diaz didn’t need to attend the hearing because Gilman would…”
State v. Marble, 901 P.2d 521 (Kan. Ct. App. 1995). “K.S.A. 22-2807(1). These conditions might include restrictions on travel, association, place of abode, or “any other condition deemed reasonably necessary to assure appearance as required.”
State v. Jones, 173 P.3d 1179 (Kan. Ct. App. 2008). “Jones contends that the district court merely revoked Jones’ bond and that recent amendments to K.S.A. 2006 Supp. 22-2807 indicate that the Kansas Legislature distinguishes between the revocation of a bond and the forfeiture of a bond.”
State v. Rodriguez (Kan. Ct. App. 2021). “If a defendant violates an appearance bond, the district court may revoke the bond as provided in K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 22-2807. If a defendant fails to appear, the district court may immediately forfeit the bond.”
— K.S.A. § 22-2807(2) — 2 cases
State v. Indem. Ins. Co. of North Am., 672 P.2d 251 (Kan. Ct. App. 1983). “The agent was not even aware of the identity of the attorney appointed for Davis on October 5, 1981, until sometime after the bond was forfeited in March, 1982.”
State v. Rodriguez (Kan. Ct. App. 2021). “If a defendant violates an appearance bond, the district court may revoke the bond as provided in K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 22-2807. If a defendant fails to appear, the district court may immediately forfeit the bond.”
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.