K.S.A. » Chapter 38
Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 38-2380 (2026)

Orders appealable by juvenile; appeal of departure sentence, procedure

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

38-2380. Orders appealable by juvenile; appeal of departure sentence, procedure. (a) Order authorizing prosecution as an adult or extended jurisdiction juvenile prosecution. (1) Unless the juvenile offender has consented to the order, a juvenile offender may take an appeal from an order authorizing prosecution as an adult. The appeal shall be taken only after conviction as an adult and in the same manner as criminal appeals, except that where the prosecution has resulted in a judgment of conviction upon a plea of guilty or nolo contendere, an appeal may be taken from the order authorizing prosecution pursuant to K.S.A. 38-2347, and amendments thereto, notwithstanding the provisions of subsection (a) of K.S.A. 22-3602, and amendments thereto.

(2) If on appeal the order authorizing prosecution as an adult is reversed but the finding of guilty is affirmed or the conviction was based on a plea of guilty or nolo contendere, the juvenile shall be deemed adjudicated to be a juvenile offender. On remand the district court shall proceed with sentencing.

(b) Orders of adjudgment and sentencing. The juvenile offender may appeal from an order of adjudication or sentencing, or both. The appeal shall be pursuant to K.S.A. 38-2382, and amendments thereto.

(1) Pending review of the sentence, the sentencing court or the appellate court may order the juvenile confined or placed on conditional release, including bond.

(2) On appeal from a judgment or conviction entered for an offense committed on or after July 1, 1999, the appellate court shall not review:

(A) Any sentence that is within the presumptive sentence for the crime; or

(B) any sentence resulting from an agreement between the state and the juvenile which the sentencing court approves on the record.

(3) In any appeal from a judgment of conviction imposing a sentence that departs from the presumptive sentence, sentence review shall be limited to whether the sentencing court's findings of fact and reasons justifying a departure:

(A) Are supported by the evidence in the record; and

(B) constitute substantial and compelling reasons for departure.

(4) In any appeal, the appellate court may review a claim that:

(A) A sentence that departs from the presumptive sentence resulted from partiality, prejudice, oppression or corrupt motive;

(B) the sentencing court erred in either including or excluding recognition of prior convictions or adjudications; or

(C) the sentencing court erred in ranking the crime severity level of the current crime or in determining the appropriate classification of a prior conviction or juvenile adjudication for criminal history purposes.

(5) The appellate court may reverse or affirm the sentence. If the appellate court concludes that the trial court's factual findings are not supported by evidence in the record or do not establish substantial and compelling reasons for a departure, it shall remand the case to the trial court for resentencing.

(6) The appellate court shall issue a written opinion whenever the judgment of the sentencing court is reversed. The court may issue a written opinion in any other case when it is believed that a written opinion will provide guidance to sentencing judges and others in implementing the placement. The appellate courts may provide by rule for summary disposition of cases arising under this section when no substantial question is presented by the appeal.

(7) A review under summary disposition shall be made solely upon the record that was before the sentencing court. Written briefs shall not be required unless ordered by the appellate court and the review and decision shall be made in an expedited manner according to rules adopted by the supreme court.

(c) Priority. Appeals under this section shall have priority over other cases except those having statutory priority.

History: L. 2006, ch. 169, § 80; January 1, 2007.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20 cases (7 in the last 5 years), 2008–2026 · leading case: In Re C.d.a.-c., 360 P.3d 443 (Kan. Ct. App. 2015).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re C.d.a.-c., 360 P.3d 443 (Kan. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 11× “The juvenile now appeals the district court’s order revoking his probation.”
In re J.P., 466 P.3d 454 (Kan. 2020). · cites it 7× “That provision, K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 38-2380(a), lets a juvenile offender appeal "from the order authorizing prosecution pursuant to K.”
State v. Ellmaker, 221 P.3d 1105 (Kan. 2009). “” See K.S.A. 2008 Supp. 38-2380(a)(l) (current version containing nearly identical language); K.”
In re L.M., 186 P.3d 164 (Kan. 2008). “K.S.A. 2006 Supp. 38-2380(b)(2)(A); (b)(3); (b)(4).”
In re T.T., 480 P.3d 790 (Kan. Ct. App. 2020). · cites it 9× “The RKJJC specifically sets out what orders are appealable by the parties in K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 38-2380. Subsection (b) provides that "[t]he juvenile offender may appeal from an order of adjudication or sentencing, or both.”
In re I.A., 491 P.3d 1241 (Kan. 2021). “The State argued that because K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 38-2380(b), which describes orders appealable by a juvenile, does not mention the later imposition of an adult sentence in an extended jurisdiction juvenile proceeding, the appellate court did not have jurisdiction to consider the…”
In re J.S.P., 439 P.3d 344 (Kan. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 7× “The only statute authorizing an appeal from juvenile proceedings is K.S.A. 2018 Supp. 38-2380. Subsection (a) of that statute authorizes some appeals from an order authorizing prosecution as an adult or EJJP: "(a) Unless the juvenile offender has consented to the order, a…”
In re I.A., 450 P.3d 347 (Kan. Ct. App. 2019). “See K.S.A. 2018 Supp. 38-2380(b); K.S.A. 2018 Supp.”
In re P.R.G., 244 P.3d 279 (Kan. Ct. App. 2010). “K.S.A. 2006 Supp. 38-2380(b)(2)(A); (b)(3); (b)(4).”
In Re Dm-T., 249 P.3d 418 (Kan. 2011). · cites it 5× “The Court of Appeals reiterated that the right to appeal is entirely statutory and stated that K.S.A.2010 Supp. 38-2380, which governs appeals in juvenile offender cases, provides no authority to appeal an adverse ruling in a postadjudication motion.”
In re S.L. (Kan. Ct. App. 2022). · cites it 8× “See K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 38-2380. But it does provide for remand if the trial court's factual findings are not supported by the evidence or do not establish substantial and compelling reasons for departure.”
In re J.A. (Kan. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 5× “K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 38-2380 identifies the orders from which a juvenile may appeal.”
Show all 20 citing cases →
K.S.A. § 38-2380(a): 3 cases
In re J.P., 466 P.3d 454 (Kan. 2020). “That provision, K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 38-2380(a), lets a juvenile offender appeal "from the order authorizing prosecution pursuant to K.”
In Re Dm-T., 249 P.3d 418 (Kan. 2011). “The Court of Appeals reiterated that the right to appeal is entirely statutory and stated that K.S.A.2010 Supp. 38-2380, which governs appeals in juvenile offender cases, provides no authority to appeal an adverse ruling in a postadjudication motion.”
State v. O.H. (Kan. Ct. App. 2024).
K.S.A. § 38-2380(a)(1): 1 case
In re J.S.P., 439 P.3d 344 (Kan. Ct. App. 2019). “The only statute authorizing an appeal from juvenile proceedings is K.S.A. 2018 Supp. 38-2380. Subsection (a) of that statute authorizes some appeals from an order authorizing prosecution as an adult or EJJP: "(a) Unless the juvenile offender has consented to the order, a…”
K.S.A. § 38-2380(a)(l): 1 case
State v. Ellmaker, 221 P.3d 1105 (Kan. 2009). “” See K.S.A. 2008 Supp. 38-2380(a)(l) (current version containing nearly identical language); K.”
K.S.A. § 38-2380(b): 10 cases
In Re C.d.a.-c., 360 P.3d 443 (Kan. Ct. App. 2015). “The juvenile now appeals the district court’s order revoking his probation.”
In re J.P., 466 P.3d 454 (Kan. 2020). “That provision, K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 38-2380(a), lets a juvenile offender appeal "from the order authorizing prosecution pursuant to K.”
In re I.A., 491 P.3d 1241 (Kan. 2021). “The State argued that because K.S.A. 2020 Supp. 38-2380(b), which describes orders appealable by a juvenile, does not mention the later imposition of an adult sentence in an extended jurisdiction juvenile proceeding, the appellate court did not have jurisdiction to consider the…”
In re I.A., 450 P.3d 347 (Kan. Ct. App. 2019). “See K.S.A. 2018 Supp. 38-2380(b); K.S.A. 2018 Supp.”
In re J.S.P., 439 P.3d 344 (Kan. Ct. App. 2019). “The only statute authorizing an appeal from juvenile proceedings is K.S.A. 2018 Supp. 38-2380. Subsection (a) of that statute authorizes some appeals from an order authorizing prosecution as an adult or EJJP: "(a) Unless the juvenile offender has consented to the order, a…”
K.S.A. § 38-2380(b)(2)(A): 12 cases
In re L.M., 186 P.3d 164 (Kan. 2008). “K.S.A. 2006 Supp. 38-2380(b)(2)(A); (b)(3); (b)(4).”
In Re C.d.a.-c., 360 P.3d 443 (Kan. Ct. App. 2015). “The juvenile now appeals the district court’s order revoking his probation.”
In re P.R.G., 244 P.3d 279 (Kan. Ct. App. 2010). “K.S.A. 2006 Supp. 38-2380(b)(2)(A); (b)(3); (b)(4).”
In re T.T., 480 P.3d 790 (Kan. Ct. App. 2020). “The RKJJC specifically sets out what orders are appealable by the parties in K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 38-2380. Subsection (b) provides that "[t]he juvenile offender may appeal from an order of adjudication or sentencing, or both.”
In re J.S.P., 439 P.3d 344 (Kan. Ct. App. 2019). “The only statute authorizing an appeal from juvenile proceedings is K.S.A. 2018 Supp. 38-2380. Subsection (a) of that statute authorizes some appeals from an order authorizing prosecution as an adult or EJJP: "(a) Unless the juvenile offender has consented to the order, a…”
K.S.A. § 38-2380(b)(5): 1 case
In re S.L. (Kan. Ct. App. 2022). “See K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 38-2380. But it does provide for remand if the trial court's factual findings are not supported by the evidence or do not establish substantial and compelling reasons for departure.”
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.