K.S.A. » Chapter 65
Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 65-2501 (2026)

Repealed

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

65-2501.

History: L. 1957, ch. 338, § 1; Repealed, L. 1972, ch. 234, § 41; July 1.

CASE ANNOTATIONS

1. Paragraphs (1), (13), (18) discussed; K.S.A. 21-2311 repealed by implication. Lawton v. Hand, 183 Kan. 694, 695, 696, 698, 331 P.2d 886.

2. Mentioned; terms "physician" and "qualified medical technician" as used in K.S.A. 8-1003 interpreted. State v. Carter, 202 Kan. 63, 65, 66, 446 P.2d 759.

3. Stash of marijuana located on information of informant; conviction for possession upheld. State v. Grider, 206 Kan. 537, 538, 479 P.2d 818.

4. Conviction under subsection (18) upheld; no error. State v. Whiters, 206 Kan. 770, 481 P.2d 992.

5. Conviction of possession of marijuana affirmed; conviction of sale reversed; defense of entrapment presents a question for the trier of facts. State v. Reichenberger, 209 Kan. 210, 211, 495 P.2d 919.

6. Cited; physician qualified to testify as an expert even though not licensed by state. State v. Jones, 209 Kan. 526, 531, 498 P.2d 65.

7. Judicial notice of dictionary definitions to corroborate testimony identifying the "narcotic drug"; conviction upheld. State v. Lightle, 210 Kan. 415, 416, 502 P.2d 834.

8. Convictions under subsection (13); telephone communications admissible where relevant; immunity from unreasonable search and seizure voluntarily waived. State v. Williamson, 210 Kan. 501, 502, 502 P.2d 777.

9. Dismissal of appeal from conviction hereunder reversed; defendant's presence by counsel sufficient at misdemeanor trial. State v. Cade, 210 Kan. 544, 502 P.2d 782.

10. Instruction on charge of unlawfully selling marijuana held sufficient. State v. Woods, 214 Kan. 739, 742, 522 P.2d 967.

11. Referred to in upholding conviction for unauthorized sale of marijuana; word "sale" construed. State v. Nix, 215 Kan. 880, 882, 529 P.2d 147.

12. Applied; amendment of information allowed after new trial granted; conviction under K.S.A. 65-2502 upheld. State v. Osburn, 216 Kan. 638, 642, 533 P.2d 1229.

13. Construction of word "sale" referred to in upholding conviction of possession of controlled substance with intent to sell. State v. Evans, 219 Kan. 515, 518, 548 P.2d 772.


Previous | Next

www.ksrevisor.gov 2026
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1969–1982 · leading case: State v. Reichenberger, 495 P.2d 919 (Kan. 1972).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Reichenberger, 495 P.2d 919 (Kan. 1972). “: Defendants appeal from felony convictions for possession and sale of marijuana in violation of the Uniform Narcotic Drug Act (K.S.A. 65-2501, et seq. ). In a trial to the court the defense of entrapment was asserted by each defendant.”
Felder v. State, 420 So. 2d 851 (Ala. Crim. App. 1982). “Thus, it is evident that Dilaudid is a narcotic drug within the definition of K.S.A. 65-2501(18).” Included in the schedule II listing of controlled substances are “opium and opiate and any salt, compound, derivative or preparation of opium or opiate.”
State v. Collazo, 573 P.2d 214 (Kan. Ct. App. 1977). “) Although the Woods decision was controlled by the “Uniform Narcotic Drug Act” (formerly found at K.S.A. 65-2501 et seq.) which was repealed in 1972 (L.”
United States v. Simon, 301 F. Supp. 859 (W.D. Wis. 1969). “23 (1968) ; Kan.Stat.Ann. §§ 65-2501 to 65-2522 (1963) ; Ky.”
K.S.A. § 65-2501(18): 1 case
Felder v. State, 420 So. 2d 851 (Ala. Crim. App. 1982). “Thus, it is evident that Dilaudid is a narcotic drug within the definition of K.S.A. 65-2501(18).” Included in the schedule II listing of controlled substances are “opium and opiate and any salt, compound, derivative or preparation of opium or opiate.”
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.