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

K.S.A. § 22-3434 (2026)

Videotape of testimony of child victim admissible in certain cases; limitations; standard of proof; objections, restrictions

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

22-3434. Videotape of testimony of child victim admissible in certain cases; limitations; standard of proof; objections, restrictions. (a) On motion of the attorney for any party to a criminal proceeding in which a child less than 13 years of age is alleged to be a victim of the crime, subject to the conditions of subsection (b), the court may order that the testimony of the child be taken:

(1) In a room other than the courtroom and be televised by closed-circuit equipment in the courtroom to be viewed by the court and the finder of fact in the proceeding; or

(2) outside the courtroom and be recorded for showing in the courtroom before the court and the finder of fact in the proceeding if: (A) The recording is both visual and aural and is recorded on film or videotape or by other electronic means; (B) the recording equipment is capable of making an accurate recording, the operator of the equipment is competent and the recording is accurate and has not been altered; (C) every voice on the recording is identified; and (D) each party to the proceeding is afforded an opportunity to view the recording before it is shown in the courtroom, and a copy of a written transcript is provided to the parties.

(b) The state must establish by clear and convincing evidence that to require the child who is the alleged victim to testify in open court will so traumatize the child as to prevent the child from reasonably communicating to the jury or render the child unavailable to testify. The court shall make such an individualized finding before the state is permitted to proceed under this section.

(c) At the taking of testimony under this section:

(1) Only the attorneys for the defendant, the state and the child, any person whose presence would contribute to the welfare and well-being of the child and persons necessary to operate the recording or closed-circuit equipment may be present in the room with the child during the child's testimony;

(2) only the attorneys may question the child;

(3) the persons operating the recording or closed-circuit equipment shall be confined to an adjacent room or behind a screen or mirror that permits them to see and hear the child during the child's testimony but does not permit the child to see or hear them; and

(4) the court shall permit the defendant to observe and hear the testimony of the child in person, but shall ensure that the child cannot hear or see the defendant.

(d) If the testimony of a child is taken as provided by this section, the child shall not be compelled to testify in court during the proceeding.

(e) (1) Any objection by any party to the proceeding to a recording under subsection (a)(2) is inadmissible must be made by written motion filed with the court at least seven days before the commencement of the trial. An objection under this subsection shall specify the portion of the recording which is objectionable and the reasons for the objection. Failure to file an objection within the time provided by this subsection shall constitute waiver of the right to object to the admissibility of the recording unless the court, in its discretion, determines otherwise.

(2) The provisions of this subsection (d) shall not apply to any objection to admissibility for the reason that the recording has been materially altered.

History: L. 1985, ch. 112, § 4; L. 1986, ch. 135, § 2; L. 1986, ch. 119, § 4; L. 1990, ch. 110, § 1; July 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 29 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1986–2025 · leading case: State v. Blanchette, 134 P.3d 19 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Blanchette, 134 P.3d 19 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 31× “At trial, the child victim testified by closed-circuit television pursuant to K.S.A. 22-3434. The primary issue on appeal is whether K.”
State v. Eaton, 769 P.2d 1157 (Kan. 1989). · cites it 19× “to testify by means of closed-circuit television, pursuant to K.S.A. 22-3434. K.S.A. 22-3434 provides in part: “(a) On motion of the attorney for any party to a criminal proceeding in which a child less than 13 years of age is alleged to be a victim of the crime, the court may…”
State v. Chisholm, 777 P.2d 753 (Kan. 1989). · cites it 20× “One of the issues of the case was whether Chisholm's Sixth Amendment right to confront his accuser was *146 violated when the trial court allowed the child witness to testify via closed-circuit television pursuant to K.S.A. 22-3434. We held it was not. Subsequently, the United…”
State v. Kuone, 757 P.2d 289 (Kan. 1988). · cites it 11× “The other alternative would be to videotape her testimony pursuant to K.S.A. 1987 Supp. 22-3434. State v. Johnson, 240 Kan.”
State v. Boyd, 127 P.3d 998 (Kan. 2006). · cites it 7× “K.S.A. 22-3434 provides that a child victim less than 13 years of age may testify by closed-circuit television if the State establishes “(b) .”
State v. Chisholm, 825 P.2d 147 (Kan. 1992). · cites it 14× “2d 547 (1988) (Chisholm I), challenged the State’s use of closed-circuit television for testimony of the child-victim witness pursuant to K.S.A. 22-3434. Chisholm claimed the statutory procedure violated his Sixth Amendment right to confront the witnesses against him.”
State v. Johnson, 729 P.2d 1169 (Kan. 1986). · cites it 8× ““(b) If a recording is admitted in evidence under this section, any party to the proceeding may call the child to testify and be cross-examined, either in the courtroom or as provided by K.S.A. 1985 Supp. 22-3434.” K.S.A. 1985 Supp.”
In re Petition for Habeas Corpus by Bowman, 441 P.3d 451 (Kan. 2019). · cites it 7× “The judge found probable cause to believe the felonies had been committed and that Bowman had committed them.”
State v. Rochelle, 298 P.3d 293 (Kan. 2013). · cites it 4× “Rochelle first directs our attention to K.S.A. 22-3434, the statute for obtaining child testimony via closed-circuit television, and argues that it demonstrates a legislative intention that some finding of necessity is required before allowing a child to testify in a…”
State v. Miller, 264 P.3d 461 (Kan. 2011). · cites it 2× “See K.S.A. 22-3434. The State maintains the trial court made the necessary findings under K.”
State v. Rowray, 860 P.2d 40 (Kan. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 5× “Rowray contends K.S.A. 1992 Supp. 22-3434 is the exclusive nontraditional method of allowing child testimony, that no individual findings of the children’s inability to testify without support were made, and that the mother should not be allowed to dictate to the court the…”
State v. Spurlock, 52 P.3d 371 (Kan. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 5× “A defendant in a sexual abuse trial is not denied the constitutional right to confrontation where the child testifies via closed-circuit television, pursuant to K.”
Show all 29 citing cases →
— K.S.A. § 22-3434(a) — 2 cases
State v. Eaton, 769 P.2d 1157 (Kan. 1989). “to testify by means of closed-circuit television, pursuant to K.S.A. 22-3434. K.S.A. 22-3434 provides in part: “(a) On motion of the attorney for any party to a criminal proceeding in which a child less than 13 years of age is alleged to be a victim of the crime, the court may…”
State v. Miller, 208 P.3d 774 (Kan. Ct. App. 2009).
— K.S.A. § 22-3434(a)(1) — 1 case
In re Petition for Habeas Corpus by Bowman, 441 P.3d 451 (Kan. 2019). “The judge found probable cause to believe the felonies had been committed and that Bowman had committed them.”
— K.S.A. § 22-3434(b) — 3 cases
State v. Blanchette, 134 P.3d 19 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006). “At trial, the child victim testified by closed-circuit television pursuant to K.S.A. 22-3434. The primary issue on appeal is whether K.”
State v. Boyd, 127 P.3d 998 (Kan. 2006). “K.S.A. 22-3434 provides that a child victim less than 13 years of age may testify by closed-circuit television if the State establishes “(b) .”
State v. Rochelle, 298 P.3d 293 (Kan. 2013). “Rochelle first directs our attention to K.S.A. 22-3434, the statute for obtaining child testimony via closed-circuit television, and argues that it demonstrates a legislative intention that some finding of necessity is required before allowing a child to testify in a…”
— K.S.A. § 22-3434(b)(4) — 2 cases
State v. Eaton, 769 P.2d 1157 (Kan. 1989). “to testify by means of closed-circuit television, pursuant to K.S.A. 22-3434. K.S.A. 22-3434 provides in part: “(a) On motion of the attorney for any party to a criminal proceeding in which a child less than 13 years of age is alleged to be a victim of the crime, the court may…”
State v. Albert, 778 P.2d 386 (Kan. Ct. App. 1989).
— K.S.A. § 22-3434(b)(l) — 1 case
State v. Johnson, 729 P.2d 1169 (Kan. 1986). ““(b) If a recording is admitted in evidence under this section, any party to the proceeding may call the child to testify and be cross-examined, either in the courtroom or as provided by K.S.A. 1985 Supp. 22-3434.” K.S.A. 1985 Supp.”
— K.S.A. § 22-3434(c) — 1 case
State v. Albert, 778 P.2d 386 (Kan. Ct. App. 1989).
— K.S.A. § 22-3434(c)(l) — 1 case
State v. Boyd, 127 P.3d 998 (Kan. 2006). “K.S.A. 22-3434 provides that a child victim less than 13 years of age may testify by closed-circuit television if the State establishes “(b) .”
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.