K.S.A. » Chapter 08
Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 8-285 (2026)

"Habitual violator" defined; other definitions

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

8-285. "Habitual violator" defined; other definitions. Except as otherwise provided in this section, as used in this act, the words and phrases defined in K.S.A. 8-234a, and amendments thereto, shall have the meanings ascribed to them therein. The term "habitual violator" means any resident or nonresident person who, within the immediately preceding five years, has been convicted in this or any other state:

(a) Three or more times of:

(1) Vehicular homicide, as defined by K.S.A. 21-3405, prior to its repeal, or K.S.A. 21-5406, and amendments thereto, or as prohibited by any ordinance of any city in this state, any resolution of any county in this state or any law of another state which is in substantial conformity with that statute;

(2) violating K.S.A. 8-1567, and amendments thereto, or violating an ordinance of any city in this state, any resolution of any county in this state or any law of another state, which ordinance, resolution or law declares to be unlawful the acts prohibited by that statute;

(3) driving while the privilege to operate a motor vehicle on the public highways of this state has been canceled, suspended or revoked, as prohibited by K.S.A. 8-262, and amendments thereto, or while such person's privilege to obtain a driver's license is suspended or revoked pursuant to K.S.A. 8-252a, and amendments thereto, or, as prohibited by any ordinance of any city in this state, any resolution of any county in this state or any law of another state which is in substantial conformity with those statutes;

(4) perjury resulting from a violation of K.S.A. 8-261a, and amendments thereto, or resulting from the violation of a law of another state which is in substantial conformity with that statute;

(5) violating the provisions of the fifth clause of K.S.A. 8-142, and amendments thereto, relating to fraudulent applications, or violating the provisions of a law of another state which is in substantial conformity with that statute;

(6) any crime punishable as a felony, if a motor vehicle was used in the perpetration of the crime;

(7) failing to stop at the scene of an accident and perform the duties required by K.S.A. 8-1602 through 8-1604, and amendments thereto, or required by any ordinance of any city in this state, any resolution of any county in this state or a law of another state which is in substantial conformity with those statutes; or

(8) violating the provisions of K.S.A. 40-3104, and amendments thereto, relating to motor vehicle liability insurance coverage, or an ordinance of any city in this state or a resolution of any county in this state which is in substantial conformity with such statute.

(b) Three or more times, either singly or in combination, of any of the offenses enumerated in subsection (a).

For the purpose of subsection (a)(2), in addition to the definition of "conviction" otherwise provided by law, conviction includes, but is not limited to, a diversion agreement entered into in lieu of further criminal proceedings, or a plea of nolo contendere, on a complaint, indictment, information, citation or notice to appear alleging a violation of K.S.A. 8-1567, and amendments thereto, or an ordinance of a city in this state, a resolution of a county in this state or law of another state, which ordinance or law prohibits the acts prohibited by those statutes.

History: L. 1972, ch. 32, § 2; L. 1975, ch. 33, § 3; L. 1976, ch. 48, § 2; L. 1977, ch. 40, § 1; L. 1982, ch. 144, § 2; L. 1985, ch. 48, § 2; L. 2001, ch. 112, § 5; L. 2011, ch. 105, § 6; L. 2012, ch. 172, § 6; L. 2018, ch. 106, § 4; July 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 34 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1979–2026 · leading case: State v. Heironimus, 941 P.2d 1356 (Kan. 1997).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Heironimus, 941 P.2d 1356 (Kan. 1997). · cites it 8× “On April 3, 1996, he was declared a habitual violator under K.S.A. 8-285 by the Division of Vehicles of the Department of Revenue (Division).”
Kansas v. Glover, 140 S. Ct. 1183 (2020). “See *1187 Kan. Stat. Ann. § 8-285 (a)(3) (2001). Glover filed a motion to suppress all evidence seized during the stop, claiming that the officer lacked reasonable suspicion.”
State v. Underwood, 693 P.2d 1205 (Kan. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 20× “The critical portion of the act is K.S.A. 8-285, which provides in part: "The term `habitual violator' means any resident or nonresident person who, within the immediately preceding five years, has been convicted in this or any other state: "(a) Three or more times of: .”
State v. Wood, 647 P.2d 1327 (Kan. 1982). · cites it 6× “The trial court checked the statute and entered judgment in favor of the defendant, holding the two convictions for violating city ordinances were not intended to be included under K.S.A. 1981 Supp. 8-285(c) as qualifying traffic offenses.”
State v. Boos, 659 P.2d 224 (Kan. 1983). · cites it 4× “Boos, declared an habitual violator of the traffic laws as defined in K.S.A. 8-285. The proceedings were initiated by the district attorney filing a “complaint” charging the defendant with being an habitual violator under K.”
State v. Lewis, 953 P.2d 1016 (Kan. 1998). · cites it 2× “8-286 (as amended in 1994) provides: “Whenever the files and records of the division shall disclose that the record of convictions of any person is such that the person is a habitual violator, as prescribed by K.S.A. 8-285 and amendments thereto, the division promptly shall…”
Stephens v. Van Arsdale, 608 P.2d 972 (Kan. 1980). · cites it 2× “"( b ) In the case of a conviction for a class A, B or C felony or any violation enumerated in subsection ( a ) of K.S.A. 1979 Supp. 8-285, and any amendments thereto, no person may petition for expungement until five or more years have elapsed since the person: (1) Satisfied…”
State v. Graham, 758 P.2d 247 (Kan. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 5× “On June 5, 1987, the Sedgwick County District Attorney’s office filed a petition seeking to have Dennis Graham declared a habitual violator under K.S.A. 1987 Supp. 8-285. Attachments to the petition indicated the Kansas Department of Revenue, Division of Vehicles (Division), as…”
State v. Proffitt, 930 P.2d 1059 (Kan. 1997). · cites it 3× “The statutory scheme in effect at the time, relative to habitual violators, provided in pertinent part: “Whenever the files and records of the division shall disclose that the record of convictions of any person is such that the person is an habitual violator, as prescribed by…”
State v. Whitehurst, 772 P.2d 1251 (Kan. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 4× “Upon contacting the radio dispatcher, Officer Hendrickson learned that Whitehurst’s driver’s license had been revoked, that Whitehurst had been declared a habitual violator (K.S.A. 1987 Supp. 8-285), and that he was under court order not to drive.”
State v. Shaffer, 788 P.2d 1341 (Kan. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 5× “The defendant argued that, in the absence of such certification, the State could not rely on the record for his adjudication as a habitual offender.”
State v. Fish, 612 P.2d 180 (Kan. 1980). · cites it 2× “) K.S.A. 1979 Supp. 8-285 provides in part as follows: “8-285.”
Show all 34 citing cases →
— K.S.A. § 8-285(3) — 1 case
State v. Weber, 775 P.2d 679 (Kan. Ct. App. 1989).
— K.S.A. § 8-285(a) — 5 cases
State v. Underwood, 693 P.2d 1205 (Kan. Ct. App. 1985). “The critical portion of the act is K.S.A. 8-285, which provides in part: "The term `habitual violator' means any resident or nonresident person who, within the immediately preceding five years, has been convicted in this or any other state: "(a) Three or more times of: .”
State v. Lewis, 953 P.2d 1016 (Kan. 1998). “8-286 (as amended in 1994) provides: “Whenever the files and records of the division shall disclose that the record of convictions of any person is such that the person is a habitual violator, as prescribed by K.S.A. 8-285 and amendments thereto, the division promptly shall…”
State v. Shaffer, 788 P.2d 1341 (Kan. Ct. App. 1990). “The defendant argued that, in the absence of such certification, the State could not rely on the record for his adjudication as a habitual offender.”
State v. Knoff, 911 P.2d 822 (Kan. Ct. App. 1996).
State v. Walden, 803 P.2d 1054 (Kan. Ct. App. 1990).
— K.S.A. § 8-285(a)(2) — 4 cases
State v. Whitehurst, 772 P.2d 1251 (Kan. Ct. App. 1988). “Upon contacting the radio dispatcher, Officer Hendrickson learned that Whitehurst’s driver’s license had been revoked, that Whitehurst had been declared a habitual violator (K.S.A. 1987 Supp. 8-285), and that he was under court order not to drive.”
State v. Day, 843 P.2d 294 (Kan. Ct. App. 1992).
State v. Shaffer, 788 P.2d 1341 (Kan. Ct. App. 1990). “The defendant argued that, in the absence of such certification, the State could not rely on the record for his adjudication as a habitual offender.”
State v. Knoff, 911 P.2d 822 (Kan. Ct. App. 1996).
— K.S.A. § 8-285(a)(3) — 2 cases
State v. Bowie, 999 P.2d 947 (Kan. 2000).
State v. Day, 843 P.2d 294 (Kan. Ct. App. 1992).
— K.S.A. § 8-285(a)(8) — 1 case
State v. Heironimus, 941 P.2d 1356 (Kan. 1997). “On April 3, 1996, he was declared a habitual violator under K.S.A. 8-285 by the Division of Vehicles of the Department of Revenue (Division).”
— K.S.A. § 8-285(b) — 4 cases
State v. Underwood, 693 P.2d 1205 (Kan. Ct. App. 1985). “The critical portion of the act is K.S.A. 8-285, which provides in part: "The term `habitual violator' means any resident or nonresident person who, within the immediately preceding five years, has been convicted in this or any other state: "(a) Three or more times of: .”
State v. Shaffer, 788 P.2d 1341 (Kan. Ct. App. 1990). “The defendant argued that, in the absence of such certification, the State could not rely on the record for his adjudication as a habitual offender.”
State v. Knoff, 911 P.2d 822 (Kan. Ct. App. 1996).
State v. Walden, 803 P.2d 1054 (Kan. Ct. App. 1990).
— K.S.A. § 8-285(c) — 1 case
State v. Wood, 647 P.2d 1327 (Kan. 1982). “The trial court checked the statute and entered judgment in favor of the defendant, holding the two convictions for violating city ordinances were not intended to be included under K.S.A. 1981 Supp. 8-285(c) as qualifying traffic offenses.”
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.