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

K.S.A. § 65-4150 (2026)

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

65-4150.

History: L. 1981, ch. 140, § 1; L. 2006, ch. 194, § 33; L. 2007, ch. 169, § 6; Repealed, L. 2009, ch. 32, § 64; July 1.

CASE ANNOTATIONS

1. Cited in case declaring probation a permissible sentence for conspiracy to unlawfully manufacture methamphetamine. State v. Moffit, 38 Kan. App. 2d 414, 166 P.3d 435 (2007).

2. Conviction hereunder; new trial ordered after trial court allowed testimony about defendant's prior marijuana use. State v. Boggs, 38 Kan. App. 2d 683, 686, 170 P.3d 912 (2007).

3. Mentioned in discussion that methamphetamine is a controlled substance. State v. Spangler, 38 Kan. App. 2d 817, 833, 173 P.3d 656 (2008).

4. Defendant found guilty of possessing drug paraphernalia with intent to use to package marijuana for sale. State v. Dean, 42 Kan. App. 2d 32, 208 P.3d 343 (2009).

5. Conviction and sentence for possession of lithium metal with intent to manufacture a controlled substance affirmed. State v. Adams, 43 Kan. App. 2d 842, 232 P.3d 347 (2010).


Previous | Next

www.ksrevisor.gov 2026
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 28 cases, 1983–2015 · leading case: State v. Snellings, 273 P.3d 739 (Kan. 2012).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Snellings, 273 P.3d 739 (Kan. 2012). · cites it 23× “" A "controlled substance" is defined by K.S.A. 2007 Supp. 65-4150(a) as "any drug, substance or immediate precursor included in any of the schedules designated in K.”
State v. Overman, 348 P.3d 516 (Kan. 2015). · cites it 4× “" K.S.A. 2007 Supp. 65-4150(c). Schoonover is our recent seminal case on double jeopardy/multiplicity claims.”
State v. Dunn, 662 P.2d 1286 (Kan. 1983). · cites it 5× “French (defendants-appellants) appeal convictions for possession with intent to deliver drug paraphernalia, in violation of the Drug Paraphernalia Act, K.S.A. 1982 Supp. 65-4150 et seq. On appeal the defendants contend (1) the trial *412 court erred in refusing to suppress…”
State v. Frazier, 42 P.3d 188 (Kan. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 3× “” Drug paraphernalia is defined in K.S.A. 65-4150(c) to include “all equipment, products and materials of any kind which are used or intended for use in .”
Wilson v. State, 71 P.3d 1180 (Kan. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 4× “K.S.A. 65-4150(c). Where two offenses contain identical elements but carry different severity level classifications, a defendant convicted of either crime may be sentenced only according to the lesser severity level.”
State v. Campbell, 106 P.3d 1129 (Kan. 2005). · cites it 2× “” K.S.A. 65-4150(c). At the time Frazier was decided, K.”
State v. Adams, 232 P.3d 347 (Kan. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 6× “Drug paraphernalia was defined in K.S.A. 65-4150(c) as: “products and materials of any kind which are used or intended for use in .”
State v. Marion, 27 P.3d 924 (Kan. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 3× “2000 Supp. 65-4153(a)(l). Marion alleges that the State combined K.”
State v. Cherry, 112 P.3d 224 (Kan. 2005). · cites it 3× “K.S.A. 65-4150(c) defines drug paraphernalia as “all equipment, products and materials of any land which are used or intended for use in planting, propagating, cultivating, growing, harvesting, manufacturing, compounding, converting, producing, processing, preparing, testing,…”
William Stoianoff D/B/A the Jt. Effort, Plaintiff-Appellant/cross-Appellee v. State of Montana, Defendants-Appellees/cross-Appellants, 695 F.2d 1214 (9th Cir. 1983). “1982)); Kansas (Kan.Stat.Ann. §§ 65-4150 to -4157 (Supp. 1981) ); Louisiana (La.”
State v. Newman, 696 P.2d 856 (Idaho 1985). “Ann.Laws ch. 94C, §§ 1, 321, 47(a)(6) (Michie/Law Co-op Supp.”
State v. Adams, 273 P.3d 718 (Kan. 2012). “K.S.A. 2007 Supp. 65-4152(c). Drug paraphernalia is defined as “equipment and materials of any land” that are intended for use in manufacturing a controlled substance.”
Show all 28 citing cases →
— K.S.A. § 65-4150(a) — 4 cases
State v. Snellings, 273 P.3d 739 (Kan. 2012). “" A "controlled substance" is defined by K.S.A. 2007 Supp. 65-4150(a) as "any drug, substance or immediate precursor included in any of the schedules designated in K.”
State v. Spangler, 173 P.3d 656 (Kan. Ct. App. 2007).
State v. Moffit, 166 P.3d 435 (Kan. Ct. App. 2007).
State v. Miles, 130 P.3d 1198 (Kan. Ct. App. 2005).
— K.S.A. § 65-4150(c) — 15 cases
State v. Snellings, 273 P.3d 739 (Kan. 2012). “" A "controlled substance" is defined by K.S.A. 2007 Supp. 65-4150(a) as "any drug, substance or immediate precursor included in any of the schedules designated in K.”
State v. Frazier, 42 P.3d 188 (Kan. Ct. App. 2002). “” Drug paraphernalia is defined in K.S.A. 65-4150(c) to include “all equipment, products and materials of any kind which are used or intended for use in .”
State v. Overman, 348 P.3d 516 (Kan. 2015). “" K.S.A. 2007 Supp. 65-4150(c). Schoonover is our recent seminal case on double jeopardy/multiplicity claims.”
Wilson v. State, 71 P.3d 1180 (Kan. Ct. App. 2003). “K.S.A. 65-4150(c). Where two offenses contain identical elements but carry different severity level classifications, a defendant convicted of either crime may be sentenced only according to the lesser severity level.”
State v. Campbell, 106 P.3d 1129 (Kan. 2005). “” K.S.A. 65-4150(c). At the time Frazier was decided, K.”
— K.S.A. § 65-4150(c)(11) — 1 case
State v. Overman, 348 P.3d 516 (Kan. 2015). “" K.S.A. 2007 Supp. 65-4150(c). Schoonover is our recent seminal case on double jeopardy/multiplicity claims.”
— K.S.A. § 65-4150(c)(12) — 1 case
State v. McMillan, 242 P.3d 203 (Kan. Ct. App. 2010).
— K.S.A. § 65-4150(c)(12)(O) — 1 case
State v. McMillan, 242 P.3d 203 (Kan. Ct. App. 2010).
— K.S.A. § 65-4150(c)(2) — 1 case
State v. Cherry, 112 P.3d 224 (Kan. 2005). “K.S.A. 65-4150(c) defines drug paraphernalia as “all equipment, products and materials of any land which are used or intended for use in planting, propagating, cultivating, growing, harvesting, manufacturing, compounding, converting, producing, processing, preparing, testing,…”
— K.S.A. § 65-4150(e) — 1 case
State v. Marion, 27 P.3d 924 (Kan. Ct. App. 2001). “2000 Supp. 65-4153(a)(l). Marion alleges that the State combined K.”
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.