K.S.A. » Chapter 60
Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 60-4105 (2026)

Property subject to forfeiture

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

60-4105. Property subject to forfeiture. The following property is subject to forfeiture:

(a) Property described in a statute authorizing forfeiture;

(b) except as otherwise provided by law, all property, of every kind, including, but not limited to, cash and negotiable instruments and the whole of any lot or tract of land and any appurtenances or improvements to real property that is either:

(1) Furnished or intended to be furnished by any person in an exchange that constitutes conduct giving rise to forfeiture; or

(2) used or intended to be used in any manner to facilitate conduct giving rise to forfeiture, including, but not limited to, any electronic device, computer, computer system, computer network or any software or data owned by the defendant which is used during the commission of an offense listed in K.S.A. 60-4104, and amendments thereto;

(c) all proceeds of any conduct giving rise to forfeiture;

(d) all property of every kind, including, but not limited to, cash and negotiable instruments derived from or realized through any proceeds which were obtained directly or indirectly from the commission of an offense listed in K.S.A. 60-4104, and amendments thereto;

(e) all weapons possessed, used, or available for use in any manner to facilitate conduct giving rise to forfeiture;

(f) ownership or interest in real property that is a homestead, to the extent the homestead was acquired with proceeds from conduct giving rise to forfeiture;

(g) contraband, which shall be seized and summarily forfeited to the state without regard to the procedures set forth in this act;

(h) all controlled substances, raw materials, controlled substance analogs, counterfeit substances, or imitation controlled substances that have been manufactured, distributed, dispensed, possessed, or acquired in violation of the laws of this state; and

(i) any items bearing a counterfeit mark.

History: L. 1994, ch. 339, § 5; L. 2000, ch. 62, § 3; L. 2006, ch. 149, § 10; L. 2006, ch. 183, § 8; L. 2011, ch. 30, § 224; L. 2013, ch. 123, § 5; July 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1997–2025 · leading case: United States v. Warren, 181 F. Supp. 2d 1232 (D. Kan. 2001).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
United States v. Warren, 181 F. Supp. 2d 1232 (D. Kan. 2001). · cites it 3× “The information recited in the search warrant affidavit, combined with the discovery of drugs, records, and large amounts of currency at defendant’s residence, gave rise to probable cause that the seized items were subject to forfeiture proceedings under Kan. Stat. Ann. §…”
State I-135/I-70 Drug Task Force v. 1990 Lincoln Town Car, 145 P.3d 921 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006). “Forfeiture Lincoln Under K.S.A. 60-4105(b)(2), all property “used or intended to be used in any manner to facilitate conduct giving rise to forfeiture” is subject to forfeiture.”
State v. Yeoman, 951 P.2d 964 (Kan. Ct. App. 1997). “K.S.A. 60-4105 provides for forfeiture of “(b) all property .”
United States v. Chandler, 18 F. Supp. 2d 1240 (D. Kan. 1998). · cites it 2× “K.S.A. § 60-4105(b)(2). No property is subject to forfeiture if the owner or interest holder acquired the property before the conduct giving rise to the claimed forfeiture and the owner or interest holder did not know and could not reasonably have known of the act or that it was…”
State v. 1997 Chevrolet Monte Carlo, 136 P.3d 496 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 4× “” The State argues the issue requires interpretation of K.S.A. 60-4105, and argues our review is de novo.”
State ex rel. Kansas High. Patrol v. $381,620 in U.S. Currency (Kan. Ct. App. 2025). · cites it 2× “K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 60-4105, K.S.A. 2019 Supp.”
State of Kansas, ex rel. KHP v. $28,350 in U.S. Currency (Kan. Ct. App. 2025). “"(d) all property of every kind, including, but not limited to, cash and negotiable instruments derived from or realized through any proceeds which were obtained directly or indirectly from the commission of an offense listed in K.”
State v. Black 1999 Lexus Es300, 244 P.3d 1274 (Kan. Ct. App. 2011). “Whether the car facilitated the criminal conduct determines if it can be forfeited in the first place — an inquiry conducted pursuant to K.S.A. 60-4105. Here, the parties have already stipulated that Wurtz’ Lexus was subject to forfeiture.”
— K.S.A. § 60-4105(a)(2) — 1 case
State v. 1997 Chevrolet Monte Carlo, 136 P.3d 496 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006). “” The State argues the issue requires interpretation of K.S.A. 60-4105, and argues our review is de novo.”
— K.S.A. § 60-4105(b)(1) — 1 case
State ex rel. Kansas High. Patrol v. $381,620 in U.S. Currency (Kan. Ct. App. 2025). “K.S.A. 2019 Supp. 60-4105, K.S.A. 2019 Supp.”
— K.S.A. § 60-4105(b)(2) — 3 cases
State I-135/I-70 Drug Task Force v. 1990 Lincoln Town Car, 145 P.3d 921 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006). “Forfeiture Lincoln Under K.S.A. 60-4105(b)(2), all property “used or intended to be used in any manner to facilitate conduct giving rise to forfeiture” is subject to forfeiture.”
United States v. Chandler, 18 F. Supp. 2d 1240 (D. Kan. 1998). “K.S.A. § 60-4105(b)(2). No property is subject to forfeiture if the owner or interest holder acquired the property before the conduct giving rise to the claimed forfeiture and the owner or interest holder did not know and could not reasonably have known of the act or that it was…”
State v. 1997 Chevrolet Monte Carlo, 136 P.3d 496 (Kan. Ct. App. 2006). “” The State argues the issue requires interpretation of K.S.A. 60-4105, and argues our review is de novo.”
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.