79-5202.
Same; imposition of tax; rates; measurement.
(a) There is hereby imposed a tax upon marijuana, domestic marijuana plants and controlled substances, as defined by K.S.A. 79-5201, and amendments thereto, at the following rates:
(1) On each gram of marijuana, or each portion of a gram, $3.50;
(2) on each gram of a wet domestic marijuana plant, $.40;
(3) on each gram of a dry domestic marijuana plant, $.90;
(4) on each gram of controlled substance, or portion of a gram, $200; and
(5) on each 50 dosage units of a controlled substance that is not sold by weight, or portion thereof, $2,000.
(b) For the purpose of calculating the tax hereunder, an ounce of marijuana or other controlled substance is measured by the weight of the substance in the dealer's possession. The weight of the marijuana or controlled substance includes all material, mixture or preparation that is added to the marijuana or controlled substance.
History:
L. 1987, ch. 366, § 2; L. 1990, ch. 359, § 2; July 1.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Constitutionality of act and uses of information obtained thereunder determined. State v. Durrant, 244 Kan. 522, 526, 769 P.2d 1174 (1989).
2. Cited in opinion holding that Kansas drug tax act does not violate due process provisions of U.S. Constitution. State v. Berberich, 248 Kan. 854, 862, 811 P.2d 1192 (1991).
3. Whether Kansas department of revenue is bound by state's plea bargain regarding drug stamp tax owed examined. Dickerson v. Kansas Dept. of Revenue, 253 Kan. 843, 846, 847, 848, 849, 863 P.2d 364 (1993).
4. Taxpayer must have possession of controlled substance for sufficient time to affix stamp to incur tax liability under KDTA (K.S.A. 79-5201 et seq.). In re Burrell, 22 Kan. App. 2d 109, 113, 912 P.2d 187 (1996).
6. Amount of controlled substance in defendant's possession insufficient to sustain drug tax stamp violation. State v. Lockhart, 24 Kan. App. 2d 488, 494, 947 P.2d 461 (1997).
7. Habeas corpus relief denied where state supreme court ruled charges did not constitute double jeopardy. Jensen v. Bouker, 96 F. Supp. 2d 1167, 1168 (2000).
8. Drug tax stamp provisions apply to possession of marketable controlled substances, but not to possession of partially manufactured items or by-products of process. State v. Capps, 33 Kan. App. 2d 37, 99 P.3d 138 (2004).
State v. Pribble, 375 P.3d 966 (Kan. 2016). · cites it 23ד79-5201(c), to distribute or possess marijuana or controlled substances without affixing the appropriate drug tax stamps, labels, or other indicia of payment of the drug tax imposed by K.S.A. 79-5202. A drug dealer's possession of both marijuana and a controlled substance, such…”
Dickerson v. Kansas Dep't of Revenue, 863 P.2d 364 (Kan. 1993). · cites it 5דAs a condition of his probation, Dickerson was ordered to pay $350 in taxes due pursuant *845 to K.S.A. 1991 Supp. 79-5202 and a fine of $350 pursuant to K.”
State v. Schoonover, 133 P.3d 48 (Kan. 2006). “Controlled substance is not defined based on whether a drug is in usable form or not.”
State v. Jensen, 915 P.2d 109 (Kan. 1996). · cites it 3דCount I with possessing marijuana with intent to sell within 1,000 feet of school property and in Count II with possessing marijuana without paying the tax imposed pursuant to K.”
Zissi v. State Tax Com'n of Utah, 842 P.2d 848 (Utah 1992). · cites it 2ד1992); Kan.Stat.Ann. §§ 79-5202(a), -5208 (1989 & Supp.”
In re the Appeal of Burch, 294 P.3d 1155 (Kan. 2013). · cites it 2ד79-5201(a)-(c); K.S.A. 79-5202. The Act prohibits the possession of a taxed substance unless the tax has been paid as evidenced by an official stamp or other indicia.”
State v. Engles, 17 P.3d 355 (Kan. 2001). “The drug tax on marijuana, K.S.A. 79-5202, is based on the weight of the drug, not on its value.”
State v. Durrant, 769 P.2d 1174 (Kan. 1989). “K.S.A. 1988 Supp. 79-5202 provides for the imposition of the tax.”
State v. Hutcherson, 968 P.2d 1109 (Kan. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2ד79-5204(a) provides as follows: “(a) No dealer may possess any marijuana, domestic marijuana plant or controlled substance upon which a tax is imposed pursuant to K.S.A. 79-5202, and amendments thereto, unless the tax has been paid as evidenced by an official stamp or other…”
State v. Lockhart, Jr., 947 P.2d 461 (Kan. Ct. App. 1997). “[the] controlled substance is measured by the weight of the substance in the dealer’s possession. The weight of the . . . controlled substance includes all material, mixture or preparation that is added to the .”
State v. Gulledge, 896 P.2d 378 (Kan. 1995). “K.S.A. 1993 Supp. 79-5201(c). K.S.A. 1993 Supp.”
In re the Appeal of Burch, 294 P.3d 1155 (Kan. 2013). “79-5201(a)-(c); K.S.A. 79-5202. The Act prohibits the possession of a taxed substance unless the tax has been paid as evidenced by an official stamp or other indicia.”
State v. Pribble, 375 P.3d 966 (Kan. 2016). “79-5201(c), to distribute or possess marijuana or controlled substances without affixing the appropriate drug tax stamps, labels, or other indicia of payment of the drug tax imposed by K.S.A. 79-5202. A drug dealer's possession of both marijuana and a controlled substance, such…”
— K.S.A. § 79-5202(a)(4) — 1 case
State v. Pribble, 375 P.3d 966 (Kan. 2016). “79-5201(c), to distribute or possess marijuana or controlled substances without affixing the appropriate drug tax stamps, labels, or other indicia of payment of the drug tax imposed by K.S.A. 79-5202. A drug dealer's possession of both marijuana and a controlled substance, such…”
— K.S.A. § 79-5202(a)(l) — 1 case
Dickerson v. Kansas Dep't of Revenue, 863 P.2d 364 (Kan. 1993). “As a condition of his probation, Dickerson was ordered to pay $350 in taxes due pursuant *845 to K.S.A. 1991 Supp. 79-5202 and a fine of $350 pursuant to K.”
— K.S.A. § 79-5202(b) — 2 cases
State v. Lockhart, Jr., 947 P.2d 461 (Kan. Ct. App. 1997). “[the] controlled substance is measured by the weight of the substance in the dealer’s possession. The weight of the . . . controlled substance includes all material, mixture or preparation that is added to the .”
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.