Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 60-467 (2026)

Original document required as evidence; exceptions

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KS-LEGkslegislature.org JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

60-467. Original document required as evidence; exceptions. (a) An original writing, recording or photograph is required in order to prove its content unless these rules or a statute provide otherwise.

(b) A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as the original unless a genuine question is raised about the original's authenticity or the circumstances make it unfair to admit the duplicate.

(c) If a writing is a telefacsimile communication and is used by the proponent or opponent as the writing itself, such telefacsimile communication shall be considered as an original.

(d) An original is not required and other evidence of the content of a writing, recording or photograph is admissible if:

(1) The writing, recording or photograph is lost or has been destroyed without fraudulent intent on the part of the proponent;

(2) the writing, recording or photograph is outside the reach of the court's process and not procurable by the proponent;

(3) the opponent, at a time when the writing, recording or photograph was under the opponent's control, has been notified, expressly or by implication from the pleadings, that it would be needed at the hearing, and on request at the hearing has failed to produce it;

(4) the writing, recording or photograph is not closely related to the controlling issues and it would be inexpedient to require its production;

(5) the writing is an official record, or is a writing affecting property authorized to be recorded and actually recorded in the public records as described in K.S.A. 60-460(s), and amendments thereto; or

(6) calculations or summaries of content are called for as a result of an examination by a qualified witness of multiple or voluminous writings, and such writings cannot be conveniently examined in court, but the adverse party shall have had a reasonable opportunity to examine such records before trial, and such writings are present in court for use in cross-examination, or the adverse party has waived their production, or the judge finds that their production is unnecessary.

(e) The proponent may prove the content of a writing, recording or photograph by the testimony, deposition or written statement of the party against whom the evidence is offered. The proponent need not account for the original.

(f) Ordinarily, the court determines whether the proponent has fulfilled the factual conditions for admitting other evidence of the content of a writing, recording or photograph under subsection (d). But in a jury trial, the jury determines any issue about whether:

(1) An asserted writing, recording or photograph ever existed;

(2) another one produced at the trial or hearing is the original; or

(3) other evidence of content accurately reflects the content.

(g) If the procedure specified by K.S.A. 60-245a(b), and amendments thereto, for providing business records has been complied with and no party has required the personal attendance of a custodian of the records or the production of the original records, the copy of the records produced shall not be excluded under subsection (a).

(h) The following definitions apply to this section:

(1) "Telefacsimile communication" means the use of electronic equipment to send or transfer a copy of an original document via telephone lines.

(2) "Photograph" means a photographic image or its equivalent stored in any form.

(3) "Original" of a writing or recording means the writing or recording itself or any counterpart intended to have the same effect by the person who executed or issued it. For electronically stored information, "original" means any printout, or other output readable by sight, if it accurately reflects the information. An "original" of a photograph includes the negative or a print from it.

(4) "Duplicate" means a counterpart produced by a mechanical, photographic, chemical, electronic or other equivalent process or technique that accurately reproduces the original.

History: L. 1963, ch. 303, 60-467; L. 1985, ch. 196, § 4; L. 1989, ch. 177, § 1; L. 2021, ch. 65, § 4; July 1.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 27 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1968–2026 · leading case: State v. Robinson, 363 P.3d 875 (Kan. 2015).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State v. Robinson, 363 P.3d 875 (Kan. 2015). · cites it 9× “See K.S.A. 60-467 (original writing required to prove its contents).”

State v. Dale, 267 P.3d 743 (Kan. 2011). · cites it 2× “Analysis Dale contends the admission of Exhibit 15, the slow motion enhancement of Exhibit 11, violated the best evidence rule as codified at K.S.A. 60-467(a). The State argues the best evidence rule does not apply because Exhibit 11 was the best evidence and was admitted at…”

State v. Smith, 993 P.2d 1213 (Kan. 1999). · cites it 2× “K.S.A. 60-467 provides that business records shall not be excluded as evidence because they are copies rather than originals.”

State v. Goodwin, 573 P.2d 999 (Kan. 1977). · cites it 3× “As his first point on appeal defendant argues the transcribed confession was inadmissible because of the best evidence rule (K.S.A. 60-467). It is argued that only the tape recording of defendant’s confession could be introduced.”

State v. Gauger, 366 P.3d 238 (Kan. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 5× “The best evidence rule is codified at K.S.A. 60-467 and states in part: “(a) As tending to prove the content of a writing, no evidence other than the writing itself is admissible, except as otherwise provided in these rules, unless the judge finds that: (1) If the writing is a…”

State v. Lovelace, 607 P.2d 49 (Kan. 1980). · cites it 2× “” Appellant contends that this testimony violates the best evidence rule, K.S.A. 60-467. Magazines are writings within the definition contained in K.”

State v. Bishop, 957 P.2d 369 (Kan. 1998). · cites it 2× “2d at 91 (citing K.S.A. 1988 Supp. 60-467[a][5]); 60-465. Relying on the original documents (the original log book of calibrations and the *728 test machine’s original certification document), the copied documents (a copy of the certified monthly standard report for the breath…”

State v. Schuette, 44 P.3d 459 (Kan. 2002). “K.S.A. 60-467(a) states in relevant part: “As tending to prove the content of a writing, no evidence other than the writing itself is admissible, except as otherwise provided in these rules, unless the judge finds [one of the enumerated exceptions].”

First Nat'l Bank of Hutchinson v. Kaiser, 564 P.2d 493 (Kan. 1977). “The defendant was entitled to attempt to establish the contents of the lost letter pursuant to K.S.A. 60-467. Whether the guaranty was limited by a concurrent agreement of the parties, expressed in plaintiff’s cover letter, was thus an issue of fact which could not be resolved…”

State v. Lieurance, 782 P.2d 1246 (Kan. Ct. App. 1989). “K.S.A. 1988 Supp. 60-467(a)(5) allows copies of official records to be used in place of the original.”

State v. Muck, 939 P.2d 896 (Kan. 1997). “The State counters the best evidence rule by contending that the district court could have found Weed’s certification card had been lost or destroyed, under K.S.A. 60-467(a)(2)(A). However, the State never requested such a finding.”

State v. Rainey, 660 P.2d 544 (Kan. 1983). “K.S.A. 60-467. We find no error in the admission of the written transcript or the cassette tape.”

Show all 27 citing cases →

— K.S.A. § 60-467(a) — 13 cases

State v. Robinson, 363 P.3d 875 (Kan. 2015). “See K.S.A. 60-467 (original writing required to prove its contents).”

State v. Dale, 267 P.3d 743 (Kan. 2011). “Analysis Dale contends the admission of Exhibit 15, the slow motion enhancement of Exhibit 11, violated the best evidence rule as codified at K.S.A. 60-467(a). The State argues the best evidence rule does not apply because Exhibit 11 was the best evidence and was admitted at…”

State v. Gauger, 366 P.3d 238 (Kan. Ct. App. 2016). “The best evidence rule is codified at K.S.A. 60-467 and states in part: “(a) As tending to prove the content of a writing, no evidence other than the writing itself is admissible, except as otherwise provided in these rules, unless the judge finds that: (1) If the writing is a…”

State v. Rohr, 878 P.2d 221 (Kan. Ct. App. 1994).

— K.S.A. § 60-467(a)(1) — 1 case

State v. Goodwin, 573 P.2d 999 (Kan. 1977). “As his first point on appeal defendant argues the transcribed confession was inadmissible because of the best evidence rule (K.S.A. 60-467). It is argued that only the tape recording of defendant’s confession could be introduced.”

— K.S.A. § 60-467(a)(2) — 1 case

State v. Rodman, 383 P.3d 187 (Kan. Ct. App. 2016).

— K.S.A. § 60-467(a)(2)(A) — 2 cases

State v. Rodman ( (Kan. Ct. App. 2016).

— K.S.A. § 60-467(a)(2)(E) — 1 case

State v. Bishop, 957 P.2d 369 (Kan. 1998). “2d at 91 (citing K.S.A. 1988 Supp. 60-467[a][5]); 60-465. Relying on the original documents (the original log book of calibrations and the *728 test machine’s original certification document), the copied documents (a copy of the certified monthly standard report for the breath…”

— K.S.A. § 60-467(a)(5) — 1 case

State v. Lieurance, 782 P.2d 1246 (Kan. Ct. App. 1989). “K.S.A. 1988 Supp. 60-467(a)(5) allows copies of official records to be used in place of the original.”

— K.S.A. § 60-467(b) — 2 cases

State v. Dreher (Kan. Ct. App. 2025).

Sutherland v. Sutherland Trust, 567 P.3d 873 (Kan. Ct. App. 2025).

— K.S.A. § 60-467(d) — 1 case

State v. Dreher (Kan. Ct. App. 2025).

— K.S.A. § 60-467(d)(2) — 1 case

Sutherland v. Sutherland Trust, 567 P.3d 873 (Kan. Ct. App. 2025).

— K.S.A. § 60-467(h)(4) — 1 case

State v. Dreher (Kan. Ct. App. 2025).

— K.S.A. § 60-467(o) — 1 case

State v. Woolridge, 581 P.2d 403 (Kan. Ct. App. 1978).

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.