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

K.S.A. § 60-472 (2026)

Photographs of property wrongfully taken

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

60-472. Photographs of property wrongfully taken. In any prosecution for a crime involving the wrongful taking of property, photographs of the property alleged to have been wrongfully taken may be deemed competent evidence of such property and may be admissible in the prosecution to the same extent as if such property had been introduced as evidence. Such photographs may be admitted into evidence if they meet the foundation requirements under the rules of evidence.

History: L. 1979, ch. 182, § 1; L. 1980, ch. 173, § 1; L. 2005, ch. 172, § 1; July 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5 cases, 1980–2004 · leading case: State v. Mayes, 98 P.3d 294 (Kan. Ct. App. 2004).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Mayes, 98 P.3d 294 (Kan. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 12× “Mayes next contends that die trial court erroneously admitted photographs which failed to comply with K.S.A. 60-472. We agree with this argument.”
State v. Heck, 661 P.2d 798 (Kan. Ct. App. 1983). · cites it 2× “22-2512 and K.S.A. 1982 Supp. 60-472 were not followed by the State.”
State v. Shoemake, 618 P.2d 1201 (Kan. 1980). “In support of his position, the defendant maintains that the foundation for the admission of the photographs was insufficient because it failed to comply with K.S.A. 1979 Supp. 60-472 which provides for the *574 admissibility of photographs of property taken in a criminal…”
State v. Winter, 712 P.2d 1228 (Kan. 1986). “60-472, which provides in effect that in any prosecution for the wrongful taking of property, photographs of the property are competent evidence of the property and may be admissible in evidence to the same extent as if the property had been offered in evidence. That statute…”
State v. Antwine & McHenry, 636 P.2d 208 (Kan. Ct. App. 1981). “It is the duty of the prosecution and the court to see that a person criminally deprived of property has it restored to him, if possible, at the earliest opportunity consistent with the protection of the rights of both the State and the defendant.”
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.