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

K.S.A. § 22-3204 (2026)

Joinder of defendants; separate trials

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

22-3204. Joinder of defendants; separate trials. When two or more defendants are jointly charged with any crime, the court may order a separate trial for any one defendant when requested by such defendant or by the prosecuting attorney.

History: L. 1970, ch. 129, § 22-3204; L. 1971, ch. 116, § 1; July 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 37 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1977–2024 · leading case: State v. Reid, 186 P.3d 713 (Kan. 2008).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Reid, 186 P.3d 713 (Kan. 2008). · cites it 4× “22-3202(3) allows two or more defendants to be charged in the same criminal complaint, information, or indictment if they are alleged to have participated in the same act or transaction or in the same series of acts or transactions constituting a crime or crimes.”
State v. Davis, 83 P.3d 182 (Kan. 2004). · cites it 8× “In Trotter , the defendant filed a pretrial motion for separate trials pursuant to K.S.A. 22-3204, but he failed to include the transcript of the hearing on that motion in the record on appeal.”
State v. King, 417 P.3d 1073 (Kan. 2018). · cites it 3× “) K.S.A. 22-3204. The State argues King waived his ability to seek severance by failing to comply with K.”
State v. Carr, 331 P.3d 544 (Kan. 2014). · cites it 2× “However, “[w]hen two or more defen *94 dants are jointly charged with any crime, the court may order a separate trial for any one defendant when requested by such defendant or by the prosecuting attorney.”
State v. Stafford, 290 P.3d 562 (Kan. 2012). · cites it 2× “K.S.A. 22-3204 governs requests for severing trials: “When two or more defendants are jointly charged with any crime, the court may order a separate trial for any one defendant when requested by such defendant or by the prosecuting attorney.”
State v. McQueen & Hardyway, 582 P.2d 251 (Kan. 1978). · cites it 4× “Such defendants may be charged in one or more counts together or separately and all of the defendants need not be charged in each count.” If the joinder of charges is proper, then the question of severance and the granting of separate trials must be considered.”
State v. Winston, 135 P.3d 1072 (Kan. 2006). · cites it 4× “The Denial of Defendant’s Motion for a Separate Trial Prior to trial, Winston requested severance from codefendant Tatum under K.S.A. 22-3204. He argued that he would be prejudiced by evidence admissible against codefendant Tatum that would not be admissible against him if he…”
State v. Warren, 356 P.3d 396 (Kan. 2015). · cites it 2× “Motion to Sever Warren claims that he and Moore had antagonistic defenses and the district court therefore erred in denying his motion to sever. Warren cannot clear the first hurdle; the two defenses were not antagonistic.”
State v. Pham, 675 P.2d 848 (Kan. 1984). · cites it 2× “The defendants were all charged in one complaint/information. Each defendant, on appeal, claims error in refusing to sever the trials.”
State v. Myrick & Nelms, 616 P.2d 1066 (Kan. 1980). · cites it 2× “Separate trials should be granted under K.S.A. 22-3204 “when severance appears necessary to avoid prejudice and ensure a fair trial to each defendant.”
State v. Coe, 574 P.2d 929 (Kan. 1977). · cites it 2× “K.S.A. 22-3204 specifically grants power to sever; however, the statute is silent concerning the power of the trial court to grant or to deny a motion to consolidate.”
State v. White, 67 P.3d 138 (Kan. 2003). “22-3202(3) allows two or more defendants to be charged in the same criminal complaint, information, or indictment if they are alleged to have participated in the same act or transaction or in the same series of acts or transactions constituting a crime or crimes.”
Show all 37 citing cases →
— K.S.A. § 22-3204(c) — 1 case
State v. Spencer Gifts, LLC, 348 P.3d 611 (Kan. Ct. App. 2015).
— K.S.A. § 22-3204(e)(4) — 1 case
State v. Sinnard, 543 P.3d 525 (Kan. 2024).
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.