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

K.S.A. § 60-425 (2026)

Self-incrimination

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

60-425. Self-incrimination. Subject to K.S.A. 60-423 and 60-437, every natural person has a privilege, which he or she may claim, to refuse to disclose in an action or to a public official of this state or the United States or any other state or any governmental agency or division thereof any matter that will incriminate such person.

History: L. 1963, ch. 303, 60-425; January 1, 1964.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1979–2025 · leading case: State v. Nott, 669 P.2d 660 (Kan. 1983).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Nott, 669 P.2d 660 (Kan. 1983). · cites it 8× “" Under this statute where a criminal defendant does not waive his right not to be called as a witness in his own trial, or if a witness exercises a self-incrimination privilege (K.S.A. 60-425), or if any party in a civil or criminal action exercises a privilege to preclude the…”
State v. Searles, 793 P.2d 724 (Kan. 1990). · cites it 4× “Searles contends that by informing the arresting officers that he would not answer that question, Searles, in addition to asserting a constitutional right, was exercising a statutory privilege "to refuse to disclose in an action or to a public official .”
State v. Carter, 57 P.3d 825 (Kan. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 5× “Fourth, Carter argues that the State’s comments regarding his silence were statutorily impermissible because they violated K.S.A. 60-425 and K.S.A. 60-439. Carter does not provide any analysis or authority supporting this argument.”
State v. Delacruz, 411 P.3d 1207 (Kan. 2018). “"); K.S.A. 60-425 (granting every natural person a privilege to refuse to disclose "any matter that will incriminate such person").”
State v. Green, 867 P.2d 366 (Kan. 1994). · cites it 2× “K.S.A. 60-425 is the codification of a defendant’s Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself or herself and permits a witness to assert a privilege against disclosing self-incriminating matter.”
State v. Aikins, 932 P.2d 408 (Kan. 1997). “60-423 and 60-437, every natural person has a privilege, which he or she may claim, to refuse to disclose in an action or to a public official of this state or the United States or any other state or any governmental agency or division thereof any matter that will incriminate…”
State v. Haislip, 701 P.2d 909 (Kan. 1985). “The privilege against self-incrimination is embodied in K.S.A. 60-425. K.S.A. 60-424 provides that a matter is incriminating “if it constitutes, or forms an essential part of, or, taken in connection with other matters disclosed, is a basis for reasonable inference of such a…”
City of Liberal v. Witherspoon, 20 P.3d 727 (Kan. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 3× “An individual’s protection against self-incrimination articulated in K.S.A. 60-425 is to be interpreted identically to the protection extended by the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution.”
State v. Johnson-Howell, 881 P.2d 1288 (Kan. 1994). “K.S.A. 60-425. A matter will incriminate a person if it constitutes, or forms an essential part of, or, taken in connection *940 with other matters disclosed, is a basis for, a reasonable inference of such a violation of the laws of this state as to subject the person to…”
State v. Longobardi, 756 P.2d 1098 (Kan. 1988). “By the time of the second trial, *408 he had been sentenced.”
State v. Rucas, 734 P.2d 673 (Kan. Ct. App. 1987). “In the case before us, the privilege is claimed by Rucas as a witness (see K.S.A. 60-425), notas an accused (see K.S.”
In Re the Investigation Into the Homicide of T.H., 932 P.2d 1023 (Kan. Ct. App. 1997). “” One of the exceptions to this general rule is the constitutional guarantee of the right against self-incrimination contained in the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, which is echoed in the Kansas Constitution and set forth in K.S.A. 60-425. The Fifth Amendment…”
Show all 17 citing cases →
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.