Allocution

22-3422. Allocution. When the defendant appears for judgment, he must be informed by the court of the verdict of the jury, or the finding of the court and asked whether he has any legal cause to show why judgment should not be rendered. If none is shown the court shall pronounce judgment against the defendant. History: L. 1970, ch. 129, § 22-3422; July 1. Source or Prior Law: 62-1510, 62-1511. Law Review and Bar Journal References: Survey of Recent Cases, 43 K.L.R. 998 (1995). CASE ANNOTATIONS 1. Defendant sentenced in absentia did not waive right to be present at sentencing; subject to resentence. State v. Fennell, 218 Kan. 170, 176, 542 P.2d 686. 2. Failure to include statement of waiver of counsel under subsection (a) of K.S.A. 22-3426 held reversible error. State v. Andrews, 5 Kan. App. 2d 678, 681, 623 P.2d 534. 3. Cited in holding direct appeal from sentence following guilty plea permissible under code of criminal procedure. State v. Green, 233 Kan. 1007, 1010, 1011, 666 P.2d 716 (1983). 4. Right to allocution waived when defendant fails to raise issue of denial in motion to modify sentence. State v. Webb, 242 Kan. 519, 522, 529, 748 P.2d 875 (1988). 5. Defendant has absolute statutory right to make a statement to the court during the proceeding known as allocution. State v. Wielgus, 14 Kan. App. 2d 145, 783 P.2d 1320 (1990). 6. Court required to address defendant personally and ask if defendant wishes to make statement (K.S.A. 22-3424) in addition to requirements of this section. State v. Heide, 249 Kan. 723, 727, 730, 822 P.2d 59 (1991). 7. Cited in court's examination of defendant's right to allocution under K.S.A. 22-3424(4); substantial justice shown. State v. Spencer, 252 Kan. 186, 188, 843 P.2d 236 (1992). 8. Remanded for resentencing where district court failed to afford defendant opportunity to speak before sentencing for violating city ordinances. City of Overland Park v. Mann, 18 Kan. App. 2d 595, 856 P.2d 523 (1993). 9. Whether trial court complied with allocation requirements examined. State v. Green, 254 Kan. 669, 687, 867 P.2d 366 (1994). 10. Whether defendant waived allocation violation issue by failing to raise in motion to modify sentence examined. State v. Johnson, 255 Kan. 156, 157, 872 P.2d 247 (1994). 11. Whether court's failure to ask if defendant has legal cause why judgment should not be rendered is harmless error examined. State v. Duke, 256 Kan. 703, 721, 723, 887 P.2d 110 (1994). 12. Judge may explain to defendant seriousness of offense and burden to mitigate punishment without violating right to allocution. State v. Vanderveen, 259 Kan. 836, 837, 841, 915 P.2d 57 (1996). 13. Defendant has no right to allocution at hearing on motion to modify sentence. State v. Lucas, 23 Kan. App. 2d 5, 6, 926 P.2d 242 (1996). 14. Capital murder defendant is entitled to right of allocation before the sentencing court, not the sentencing jury. State v. Stallings, 284 Kan. 741, 742, 743, 163 P.3d 1232 (2007). 15. Failure to comply with K.S.A. 22-3422 results in error that is subject to a harmless error standard of review. State v. Valladarez, 288 Kan. 671, 206 P.3d 879 (2009). 16. Party may be notified of the taxation of costs through a statement served at the end of criminal proceedings. State v. Phillips, 289 Kan. 28, 210 P.3d 93 (2009). Previous | Next LEGISLATIVE COORDINATING COUNCIL General Policies 2026 Archived LCC Documents Archived LCC Meetings REVISOR OF STATUTES Archived Session Documents Archived School Finance Documents USEFUL LINKS Session Laws Kansas Administrative Regulations OTHER LEGISLATIVE SITES Kansas Legislature Administrative Services Division of Post Audit Research Department Contact Us PDF Help www.ksrevisor.gov 2026