Other crimes or civil wrongs

60-455. Other crimes or civil wrongs. (a) Subject to K.S.A. 60-447, and amendments thereto, evidence that a person committed a crime or civil wrong on a specified occasion, is inadmissible to prove such person's disposition to commit crime or civil wrong as the basis for an inference that the person committed another crime or civil wrong on another specified occasion. (b) Subject to K.S.A. 60-445 and 60-448, and amendments thereto, such evidence is admissible when relevant to prove some other material fact including motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity or absence of mistake or accident. (c) Subject to K.S.A. 60-445 and 60-448, and amendments thereto, in any criminal action other than a criminal action in which the defendant is accused of a sex offense under articles 34, 35 or 36 of chapter 21 of the Kansas Statutes Annotated, prior to their repeal, or articles 54, 55 or 56 of chapter 21 of the Kansas Statutes Annotated, or K.S.A. 21-6104, 21-6325, 21-6326 or 21-6419 through 21-6422, and amendments thereto, such evidence is admissible to show the modus operandi or general method used by a defendant to perpetrate similar but totally unrelated crimes when the method of committing the prior acts is so similar to that utilized in the current case before the court that it is reasonable to conclude the same individual committed both acts. (d) Except as provided in K.S.A. 60-445, and amendments thereto, in a criminal action in which the defendant is accused of a sex offense under articles 34, 35 or 36 of chapter 21 of the Kansas Statutes Annotated, prior to their repeal, or articles 54, 55 or 56 of chapter 21 of the Kansas Statutes Annotated, or K.S.A. 21-6104, 21-6325, 21-6326 or 21-6419 through 21-6422, and amendments thereto, evidence of the defendant's commission of another act or offense of sexual misconduct is admissible, and may be considered for its bearing on any matter to which it is relevant and probative. (e) In a criminal action in which the prosecution intends to offer evidence under this rule, the prosecuting attorney shall disclose the evidence to the defendant, including statements of witnesses, at least 10 days before the scheduled date of trial or at such later time as the court may allow for good cause. (f) This rule shall not be construed to limit the admission or consideration of evidence under any other rule or to limit the admissibility of the evidence of other crimes or civil wrongs in a criminal action under a criminal statute other than in articles 34, 35 or 36 of chapter 21 of the Kansas Statutes Annotated, prior to their repeal, or articles 54, 55 or 56 of chapter 21 of the Kansas Statutes Annotated, or K.S.A. 21-6104, 21-6325, 21-6326 or 21-6419 through 21-6422, and amendments thereto. (g) As used in this section, an "act or offense of sexual misconduct" includes: (1) Any conduct proscribed by article 35 of chapter 21 of the Kansas Statutes Annotated, prior to their repeal, or article 55 of chapter 21 of the Kansas Statutes Annotated, or K.S.A. 21-6419 through 21-6422, and amendments thereto; (2) the sexual gratification component of aggravated human trafficking, as described in K.S.A. 21-3447(a)(1)(B) or (a)(2), prior to its repeal, or K.S.A. 21-5426(b)(1)(B) or (b)(2), and amendments thereto; (3) exposing another to a life threatening communicable disease, as described in K.S.A. 21-3435(a)(1), prior to its repeal, or K.S.A. 21-5424(a)(1), and amendments thereto; (4) incest, as described in K.S.A. 21-3602, prior to its repeal, or K.S.A. 21-5604(a), and amendments thereto; (5) aggravated incest, as described in K.S.A. 21-3603, prior to its repeal, or K.S.A. 21-5604(b), and amendments thereto; (6) contact, without consent, between any part of the defendant's body or an object and the genitals, mouth or anus of the victim; (7) contact, without consent, between the genitals, mouth or anus of the defendant and any part of the victim's body; (8) deriving sexual pleasure or gratification from the infliction of death, bodily injury or physical pain to the victim; (9) an attempt, solicitation or conspiracy to engage in conduct described in paragraphs (1) through (8); or (10) any federal or other state conviction of an offense, or any violation of a city ordinance or county resolution, that would constitute an offense under article 35 of chapter 21 of the Kansas Statutes Annotated, prior to their repeal, or article 55 of chapter 21 of the Kansas Statutes Annotated, or K.S.A. 21-6419 through 21-6422, and amendments thereto, the sexual gratification component of aggravated human trafficking, as described in K.S.A. 21-3447(a)(1)(B) or (a)(2), prior to its repeal, or K.S.A. 21-5426(b)(1)(B) or (b)(2), and amendments thereto; incest, as described in K.S.A. 21-3602, prior to its repeal, or K.S.A. 21-5604(a), and amendments thereto; or aggravated incest, as described in K.S.A. 21-3603, prior to its repeal, or K.S.A. 21-5604(b), and amendments thereto, or involved conduct described in paragraphs (6) through (9). (h) If any provisions of this section or the application thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid, the invalidity does not affect other provisions or applications of this section which can be given effect without the invalid provisions or application. To this end the provisions of this section are severable. History: L. 1963, ch. 303, 60-455; L. 2009, ch. 103, § 12; L. 2011, ch. 30, § 215; L. 2015, ch. 94, § 20; July 1. Law Review and Bar Journal References: Cited as being codification of early Kansas law, Spencer A. Gard, 14 K.L.R. 263, 264 (1965). Cited in comment on introduction of evidence of prior crimes, Clarence Koch, 6 W.L.J. 176, 179 (1966). Section did not materially change case law existing prior to the adoption of the code, Spencer A. Gard, 16 K.L.R. 125, 126, 129, 130, 131, 132 (1967). Comment on admissibility of prior convictions into evidence, Lawrence E. Schauf, 9 W.L.J. 478, 479, 480, 481, 482 (1970). Note concerning the defense of entrapment, John E. Caton, 12 W.L.J. 64, 73 (1972). Comment concerning use of evidence of prior convictions, Wendell F. Cowan, Jr., 12 W.L.J. 111, 113 (1972). "The Entrapment Defense in Drug Cases," Richard H. Seaton, 41 J.B.A.K. 217, 239 (1972). "Other Vices, Other Crimes: An Evidentiary Dilemma," M. C. Slough, 20 K.L.R. 411, 415, 416, 421, 422, 423, 426, 427, 428, 431 (1972). Comment concerning entrapment defense in narcotic sales cases, William J. Olmstead, 12 W.L.J. 231, 233 (1973). Comment concerning admissibility of similar offenses to prove identity, 14 W.L.J. 367 (1975). Survey of criminal law, Dan Walter and Dick Ring, 15 W.L.J. 341, 346, 347 (1976). The legal effect of jury answers to special verdict questions under Kansas comparative negligence law, David E. Pierce, 16 W.L.J. 114, 122 (1976). "Other Vices, Other Crimes: K.S.A. 60-455 Revisited," M.C. Slough, 26 K.L.R. 161 (1978). "Evidence of Other Crimes in Kansas," Randall K. Rathbun and Chad M. Renn, 17 W.L.J. 98, 102 (1977). "Survey of Kansas Law: Evidence," Spencer A. Gard, 27 K.L.R. 225, 233, 235, 238 (1979). "Bench Decisions and Opinion Writing," Robert H. Miller, 47 J.B.A.K. 247, 248, 249 (1978). "Opening Statements," Carla Stovall Roitz and Laurence Rose, 5 J.K.T.L.A. No. 5, 32 (1982). "Survey of Kansas Law: Evidence," Mark M. Dobson, 32 K.L.R. 625, 635, 636, 638 (1984). "Into the Briar Patch," James L. Eisenbrandt, Vol. VIII, No. 2, J.K.T.L.A. 22 (1984). "Expungement: Lies That Can Hurt You in and out of Court," Steven K. O'Hern, 27 W.L.J. 574, 578, 586, 589, 598 (1988). "Kansas State Court Appellate Standards of Review: An Understanding Unblinded," Robert W. Parnacott, 62 J.K.B.A. No. 10, 34, 38 (1993). "Criminal Procedure Review: Survey of Recent Cases," 44 K.L.R. 895 (1996). "Res Gestae Raises Its Ugly Head," Dennis D. Prater and Virginia M. Klemme, 65 J.K.B.A. No. 8, 24 (1996). "The Marital Discord Exemption to Hearsay: Fact or Judicially Legislated Fiction?" Christine Arguello, 46 K.L.R. 63 (1997). "Some Other Dude Did It (But Will You Be Allowed to Prove It?)," Dennis Prater and Tammy M. Somogye, 67 J.K.B.A. No. 4, 28 (1998). "Other Misconduct Evidence," Christopher M. Joseph, 49 K.L.R. 145 (2000). "Call it a 'Plan' and A Defendant's Prior (Similar) Sexual Misconduct Is In: The Disappearance of K.S.A. 60-455," Troy W. Purinton, 70 J.K.B.A. No. 8, 30 (2001). "Criminal Procedure Survey of Recent Cases," 50 K.L.R. 901 (2002). "Beyond Hendricks: The United States Supreme Court Decision in Kansas v. Crane and other issues concerning Kansas' Sexually Violent Predator Act," Kevin J. Breer, 71 J.K.B.A. No. 4, 13 (2002). "Criminal Procedure Survey of Recent Cases," Matt Corbin, Editor, 51 K.L.R. 659, 762 (2003). "How Similar is Similar?: Confusing the Similarity Standards for the Admission of Prior Crimes Evidence Under the Plan Exception in Child Molestation Cases," Joletta Friesen, 44 W.L.J. 157, 159, 166, 169, 183 (2004). "Lurching Toward the Light: Alternative Means and Multiple Acts Law in Kansas," Carol A. Beier, 44 W.L.J. 275 (2005). Criminal Procedure Survey, 55 K.L.R. 797 (2007). Criminal Procedure Survey, 56 K.L.R. 745 (2008). "A New Guiding Principle: The Kansas Supreme Court's Trend to Review and Reconsider Legal Precedent," Ryan Farley and Nicole Romine, 77 J.K.B.A. No. 8, 16 (2011). Attorney General's Opinions: National minimum drinking age act; history and intent of language of K.S.A. 41-104. 86-74. CASE ANNOTATIONS 1. Rule of evidence as applied to criminal proceedings has not materially changed case law. State v. Wright, 194 Kan. 271, 274, 275, 398 P.2d 339. 2. Admissibility of evidence of similar offenses in criminal proceedings considered. State v. Lewis, 195 Kan. 389, 392, 393, 405 P.2d 796. 3. Identification of defendant by cashier where forged check cashed. State v. Gates, 196 Kan. 216, 217, 410 P.2d 264. 4. Rule not materially changed by enactment of this section. State v. Poulos, 196 Kan. 287, 292, 411 P.2d 689. 5. Evidence of similar offenses; nature of proof; instructions. State v. Mader, 196 Kan. 469, 473, 412 P.2d 1001. 6. Admission of evidence of prior actions and statements permitted in conviction of grand larceny. State v. Crowe, 196 Kan. 622, 625, 414 P.2d 50. 7. Question regarding prior conviction of felony not prejudicial error. State v. Hunt, 198 Kan. 222, 424 P.2d 571. 8. Instructions to jury limited to purposes set out herein. State v. Taylor, 198 Kan. 290, 292, 296, 424 P.2d 612. 9. Evidence of prior crime admissible, under proper instruction, to prove a material fact. State v. Omo, 199 Kan. 167, 173, 428 P.2d 768. 10. Application and construction of section reviewed; evidence of prior conviction inadmissible for sole purpose of impairing credibility. State v. Motley, 199 Kan. 335, 337, 338, 430 P.2d 264. 11. Evidence relevant to prove motive excepted from prohibition of this section. State v. Booker, 200 Kan. 166, 174, 434 P.2d 801. 12. Evidence of intent to steal is relevant and material to issue of intent under K.S.A. 21-2437. State v. Jerrel, 200 Kan. 415, 420, 436 P.2d 973. 13. Where evidence of prior offenses inadmissible under K.S.A. 60-421 but admissible hereunder, court must instruct jury as to its limited purpose; failure to do so, regardless of request for such, is prejudicial error. State v. Roth, 200 Kan. 677, 678, 679, 680, 682, 683, 438 P.2d 58. 14. No requirement that in criminal case evidence of similar but independent offenses must be presented in state's case in chief. State v. McCorvey, 199 Kan. 194, 195, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 428 P.2d 762. Modified in part: State v. Roth, 200 Kan. 677, 682, 683, 438 P.2d 58. 15. Conviction of forgery and possession of counterfeit certificate of title; evidence of similar offenses admitted. State v. Jarvis, 201 Kan. 678, 681, 682, 443 P.2d 272. 16. Construed; evidence of previous convictions properly admitted over objections. State v. Anderson, 202 Kan. 52, 56, 57, 446 P.2d 844. 17. Evidence showing prior conviction in Oklahoma for robbery with firearms properly admitted. State v. Davis, 202 Kan. 61, 446 P.2d 831. 18. Authenticated copy of prior conviction admissible to show defendant's plan of operation, since identity of person committing offense was in issue. State v. Taylor, 202 Kan. 202, 206, 447 P.2d 806. 19. Evidence of former conviction is admissible if offenses are similar; need not be identical. State v. Jamerson, 202 Kan. 322, 324, 449 P.2d 542. 20. Crimes committed in 1963 similar to crimes committed in 1966 are not made irrelevant by the intervening time; largely within discretion of trial court. State v. Yates, 202 Kan. 406, 411, 449 P.2d 575. 21. Trial court has wide discretion with respect to the admission of evidence of similar acts or occurrences as proof that a particular act was done, or that a certain occurrence happened; reasons for rule. Frame, Administrator v. Bauman, 202 Kan. 461, 466, 449 P.2d 525. 22. Where prior convictions by defendant are in question, state should offer evidence showing that defendant is the same person who was previously convicted. State v. Cippola, 202 Kan. 624, 630, 451 P.2d 199. 23. Improper cross examination; competency of counsel questioned; denial of fair trial discussed (dissenting opinion). State v. Wright, 203 Kan. 54, 59, 453 P.2d 1. 24. Conviction of 1st degree robbery; claim of erroneous admissions of evidence not sustained. State v. Dearman, 203 Kan. 94, 95, 96, 453 P.2d 7. 25. Construed and applied; court's instruction should be limited to purpose of statute or analogous purposes. State v. Jenkins, 203 Kan. 354, 356, 357, 359, 454 P.2d 496. 26. Objection posed by defendant to evidence of prior convictions held insufficient to serve as basis for new trial. State v. Patchett, 203 Kan. 642, 643, 644, 455 P.2d 580. 27. Evidence of similar fraudulent representations made to others is competent and relevant to show intent to defraud. Culp v. Bloss, 203 Kan. 714, 718, 457 P.2d 154. 28. Mentioned as not being effective at the time of defendant's trial. Peterson v. State, 203 Kan. 959, 964, 457 P.2d 6. 29. Prosecuting attorney's reference to subsequent offense held not prejudicial to prosecution of offense charged. State v. Miller, 204 Kan. 46, 48, 460 P.2d 564. 30. Not error to admit authenticated copy of journal entry of prior conviction in another state. State v. Johnson, 204 Kan. 62, 63, 460 P.2d 505. 31. Remoteness in time of prior conviction affects weight and probative value, not admissibility of evidence; relevancy left to judicial discretion. State v. O'Neal, 204 Kan. 226, 230, 461 P.2d 801. 32. Evidence of other thefts admissible to prove preparation and plan. State v. Fabian, 204 Kan. 237, 238, 461 P.2d 799. 33. Evidence of prior conviction for same type of offense is relevant; properly admitted hereunder. State v. Holsey, 204 Kan. 407, 411, 464 P.2d 12. 34. Evidence of prior conviction admitted hereunder and jury instructed as to limited purpose for which admitted; no error shown. State v. Kowalec, 205 Kan. 57 59, 468 P.2d 221. 35. Trial court did not err in overruling objections to questions designed to show defendant's interest, motive and method of operation. State v. Hale, 206 Kan. 521, 525, 479 P.2d 902. 36. Admission of evidence concerning similar offenses, for limited purpose, authorized hereunder. State v. Whiters, 206 Kan. 770, 771, 772, 481 P.2d 992. 37. Prior conviction for burglary and larceny relevant and admissible with respect to charge of attempted second degree burglary. State v. Kincade, 207 Kan. 442, 444, 485 P.2d 1385. 38. Evidence otherwise relevant in a criminal prosecution not inadmissible because it may show another or a greater crime than that charged. State v. Crowe, 207 Kan. 473, 475, 486 P.2d 503. 39. Conviction of forcible rape upheld; evidence of commission of other like offenses by defendant not rendered inadmissible because defendant had not been convicted of such other offenses or because they occurred subsequent to the offense for which he was being tried. State v. Morgan, 207 Kan. 581, 582, 485 P.2d 1371. 40. Evidence of membership in revolutionary society properly admitted. State v. Pierce, et al., 208 Kan. 19, 29, 490 P.2d 584. 41. Evidence concerning revocation of defendant's license to practice chiropractic admissible in prosecution under K.S.A. 21-437. State v. Darling, 208 Kan. 469, 470, 478, 493 P.2d 216. 42. Where prior conviction shown to prove opportunity, intent, plan, etc., it may also be used to invoke the habitual criminal act for sentencing. State v. Karney, 208 Kan. 677, 683, 494 P.2d 1204. 43. Error not to give instruction limiting scope of evidence of prior conviction. State v. Rambo, 208 Kan. 929, 930, 495 P.2d 101. 44. Evidence showing independent offense, if otherwise relevant, held admissible. State v. Martin, 208 Kan. 950, 951, 952, 953, 495 P.2d 89. 45. Evidence of previous robbery conviction properly received. State v. Phippen, 208 Kan. 962, 968, 494 P.2d 1137. 46. Construed; evidence of past traffic offenses not admissible to show disposition of plaintiff as to speeding. Hampton v. State Highway Commission, 209 Kan. 565, 579, 498 P.2d 236. 47. Cited; prior conviction admissible to prove element of unlawful possession of firearms charge, not for purposes hereunder. State v. Knowles, 209 Kan. 676, 679, 680, 498 P.2d 40. 48. Prior convictions for similar homicides are admissible as relevant evidence on the issue of identity. State v. Johnson, 210 Kan. 288, 292, 293, 502 P.2d 802. 49. Evidence of prior rapes admissible; instruction thereto should include only those elements of K.S.A. 60-455 which apply. State v. Masqua, 210 Kan. 419, 422, 423, 502 P.2d 728. 50. Evidence of prior crimes inadmissible hereunder is admissible where defendant announced intention to testify thereto. State v. Scott, 210 Kan. 426, 434, 502 P.2d 573. 51. Section not invoked in response of objection to evidence of parole violation; conviction reversed for prejudice. State v. Long, 210 Kan. 436, 438, 502 P.2d 810. 52. Evidence of prior convictions first elicited on cross-examination; good character, credibility not introduced; prejudicial error. State v. Gunzelman, 210 Kan. 481, 488, 502 P.2d 705. 53. Prior conviction of auto theft properly admitted; proper application of statute; relevant to show intent. State v. Kress, 210 Kan. 522, 525, 526, 502 P.2d 827. 54. Evidence not inadmissible because it may show a crime other than that charged. State v. Calvert, 211 Kan. 174, 177, 180, 181, 182, 505 P.2d 1110. 55. Admission of petty larceny conviction into evidence for limited purpose proper; section applied. State v. Carpenter, 211 Kan. 234, 238, 505 P.2d 753. 56. Cited; record indicated appellant not prejudiced by prosecutor's opening statement that prior conviction would be proved; conviction upheld. State v. McCollum, 211 Kan. 631, 643, 507 P.2d 196. 57. Knowledge that horses had previously escaped into areas of traveled highways key to foreseeability of danger; defendant held negligent. Cooper v. Eberly, 211 Kan. 657, 669, 508 P.2d 943. 58. "Inclinations" or "tendencies" to commit crime are not to be shown by proof of prior delinquencies. State v. Seely, 212 Kan. 195, 205, 510 P.2d 115. 59. Relevancy not the only test for admissibility hereunder; evidence held inadmissible as not subject to any statutory exceptions. State v. Davis, 213 Kan. 54, 56, 57, 58, 515 P.2d 802. 60. No error in failing to give limiting instruction on purpose of evidence of prior crimes when evidence admissible independent of this section. State v. Ralls, 213 Kan. 249, 255, 256, 515 P.2d 1205. 61. Evidence of prior crimes not admissible to establish inclination, attitude or tendencies. State v. Clingerman, 213 Kan. 525, 527, 530, 531, 516 P.2d 1022. 62. Defendant's own admission on direct examination waived protection of this section; refusal to limit instruction not error. State v. Greene, 214 Kan. 78, 82, 519 P.2d 651. 63. Applied; conviction of attempted aggravated burglary; evidence of previous convictions properly admitted. State v. Nading, 214 Kan. 249, 254, 519 P.2d 714. 64. Evidence of prior crime inadmissible hereunder to show defendant's inclination, disposition, or tendencies. State v. Clark, 214 Kan. 293, 299, 521 P.2d 298. 65. Technical objections to instructions not considered when raised for first time on appeal. State v. Wilson, 215 Kan. 28, 33, 523 P.2d 337. 66. Conviction of possession of firearm under K.S.A. 21-4202; instructions proper; evidence of similar prior offenses admitted. State v. Atkinson, 215 Kan. 139, 142, 523 P.2d 737. 67. Construed and applied; admission of subsequent conviction in prosecution for aggravated robbery and assault erroneous; harmless error. State v. Bly, 215 Kan. 168, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 523 P.2d 397. 68. Applied; admission of evidence of other crimes held proper in prosecution for perjury in seeking license under K.S.A. 41-2703. State v. Craig, 215 Kan. 381, 383, 524 P.2d 679. 69. Contention section violated in prosecution for aggravated battery; evidence of prior convictions inadmissible. State v. Harris, 215 Kan. 649, 650, 527 P.2d 949. 70. Applied; conviction of one count of aggravated battery; evidence pertaining to separate similar counts held admissible. State v. Ritson, 215 Kan. 742, 747, 529 P.2d 90. 71. Evidence of similar offenses admitted in prosecution for rape; no abuse of discretion; conviction upheld. State v. Hampton, 215 Kan. 907, 908, 529 P.2d 127. 72. Evidence of past crimes to be offered in state's case in chief or on rebuttal; new trial ordered. State v. Harris, 215 Kan. 961, 963, 529 P.2d 101. 73. Contention admission of prior convictions used to prejudice jury and not similar to offenses charged; not upheld. State v. Smith, 216 Kan. 265, 269, 530 P.2d 1215. 74. Form of instruction given hereunder for prior conviction erroneous. State v. Boyd, 216 Kan. 373, 378, 532 P.2d 1064. 75. Probative value of evidence introduced hereunder outweighed by prejudicial impact; judgment reversed. State v. Cross, 216 Kan. 511, 512, 513, 514, 516, 517, 518, 519, 520, 521, 522, 532 P.2d 1357. 76. Applied; conviction of assault and possession of firearm; no prejudicial error in instructions to jury. State v. Rasler, 216 Kan. 582, 586, 587, 533 P.2d 1262. 77. No abuse of discretion in admitting evidence of similar offenses; instructions not erroneous; conviction under K.S.A. 21-3502, 21-3506 and 21-3716 upheld. State v. James, 217 Kan. 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 535 P.2d 991. 78. Conviction hereunder; no abuse of discretion in admission of evidence of similar offenses or instructions. State v. Gonzales, 217 Kan. 159, 161, 163, 535 P.2d 988. 79. Conviction of manslaughter; evidence properly admitted; instructions not erroneous. State v. Anicker, 217 Kan. 314, 316, 536 P.2d 1355. 80. Narcotics addiction not trait of character; medical fact; not crime or civil wrong. State v. Ralph, 217 Kan. 457, 459, 537 P.2d 200. 81. Defendant not prejudiced by reception of rebuttal prosecution testimony. State v. Sisson, 217 Kan. 475, 480, 536 P.2d 1369. 82. Applied; no error in admission of evidence of prior convictions; issue of insanity; intent. State v. Lohrbach, 217 Kan. 588, 589, 590, 538 P.2d 678. 83. Question of admissibility of evidence regarding prior felony not considered on appeal where no timely objection thereto. State v. Andrews, 218 Kan. 156, 160, 542 P.2d 325. 84. Admission of evidence of California conviction harmless error; did not invalidate conviction. State v. Fennell, 218 Kan. 170, 173, 542 P.2d 686. 85. Evidence of specific instances of conduct to rebut evidence of good character, erroneously admitted; limiting instruction did not cure. State v. Gregory, 218 Kan. 180, 188, 542 P.2d 1051. 86. Admission of evidence of prior conviction, under facts and circumstances shown not prejudicial error. State v. Moore, 218 Kan. 450, 453, 454, 543 P.2d 923. 87. Admission of prior convictions hereunder not reversible error; conviction affirmed. State v. Watkins, 219 Kan. 81, 92, 93, 547 P.2d 810. 88. Erroneous admission of prior robbery convictions constituted prejudice; instructions disapproved; new trial granted. State v. Donnelson, 219 Kan. 772, 773, 774, 775, 776, 777, 549 P.2d 964. 89. Section has no application to evidence offered to impeach credibility of witness. State v. Johnson, 219 Kan. 847, 852, 549 P.2d 1370. 90. Conviction of felony theft; instructions in compliance with section. State v. Carter, 220 Kan. 16, 17, 20, 23, 551 P.2d 821. 91. Trial court did not abuse discretion in refusing to sever separate counts of information. State v. Gander, 220 Kan. 88, 90, 91, 551 P.2d 797. 92. Admission of evidence of prior conviction upheld; conviction of burglary. State v. Howard, 220 Kan. 117, 120, 551 P.2d 835. 93. Admission of journal entry of previous conviction without requiring evidence of similarity of past and present crimes upheld. State v. Faulkner, 220 Kan. 153, 154, 155, 156, 551 P.2d 1247. 94. Bank ledger sheets admissible in evidence in prosecution under K.S.A. 21-3707; conviction not prerequisite to admission. State v. Powell, 220 Kan. 168, 170, 171, 172, 551 P.2d 902. 95. Relevant evidence not rendered inadmissible because it may disclose another offense. State v. Solem, 220 Kan. 471, 475, 552 P.2d 951. 96. Limiting instruction given in connection with evidence of prior conviction not erroneous; attempted burglary conviction affirmed. State v. Wasinger, 220 Kan. 599, 601, 602, 603, 605, 556 P.2d 189. 97. Admission of prior conviction of rape in prosecution for aggravated sodomy did not amount to denial of substantial justice; harmless error. State v. Yates, 220 Kan. 635, 636, 637, 556 P.2d 176. 98. Evidence relevant to show commission of crime admissible independent of this section although it may tend to connect with another crime. State v. Mitchell, 220 Kan. 700, 703, 556 P.2d 874. 99. Unsolicited and vague reference to prior criminal case involving defendant held harmless error. State v. Mims, 220 Kan. 726, 728, 556 P.2d 387. 100. Rebuttal testimony concerning crimes committed in Oklahoma allowed; convictions under K.S.A. 21-3701 and 21-3715 affirmed. State v. Burnett, 221 Kan. 40, 43, 44, 558 P.2d 1087. 101. Objection to evidence of other crimes sustained; instruction deleted; invited error; no review on appeal. State v. Gross, 221 Kan. 98, 99, 558 P.2d 665. 102. Permitting state to cross examine defendant on matters he had introduced in evidence not error; conviction under K.S.A. 21-3734 affirmed. State v. Ferguson, 221 Kan. 103, 106, 107, 558 P.2d 1092. 103. Failure to give limiting instruction not error when challenged evidence independently admissible. State v. Smolin, 221 Kan. 149, 154, 155, 557 P.2d 1241. 104. Admission of rebuttal evidence going to credibility of defense witnesses upheld. State v. Blue, 221 Kan. 185, 187, 188, 189, 558 P.2d 136. 105. Contention evidence of other crimes was received in violation of section held without merit. State v. Black, 221 Kan. 248, 251, 559 P.2d 784. 106. Evidence concerning parole officer of defendant not offered as testimony of prior crimes; motion for mistrial properly overruled. State v. Wilson & Went- worth, 221 Kan. 359, 364, 559 P.2d 374. 107. Construction referred to in denying post conviction relief; appealable questions; no trial errors excusing appeal. Estes v. State, 221 Kan. 412, 413, 559 P.2d 392. 108. Information surreptitiously obtained inadmissible; prosecution for conspiracy to commit arson. State v. Daugherty, 221 Kan. 612, 618, 621, 562 P.2d 42. 109. Applied; murder conviction; no reversible error in admission of evidence. State v. Henson, 221 Kan. 635, 640, 641, 644, 645, 562 P.2d 51. 110. Admission of evidence of past crimes hereunder proper and within limits of judicial discretion. State v. Fisher, 222 Kan. 76, 84, 85, 86, 563 P.2d 1012. 111. Prior disposition to commit crimes may be shown when entrapment defense raised; entrapment defense discussed. State v. Amodei, 222 Kan. 140, 142, 563 P.2d 440. 112. Admission of weapon into evidence not in error; possession of weapon not a crime or civil wrong. State v. DeMotte, 222 Kan. 206, 207, 563 P.2d 476. 113. Admission of certain evidence pertaining to prior civil wrongs held proper. Hubin v. Shira, 1 Kan. App. 2d 203, 204, 208, 209, 210, 211, 563 P.2d 1079. 114. Evidence of prior misdemeanor conviction admitted for limited purpose. State v. Forsyth, 2 Kan. App. 2d 44, 45, 46, 574 P.2d 241. 115. Section properly applied; facts sufficient to demonstrate a pattern of similarity. State v. Jackson, 222 Kan. 424, 427, 428, 565 P.2d 278. 116. Evidence received of defendant's prior conviction of a similar offense; not error. State v. Brooks, 222 Kan. 432, 434, 565 P.2d 241. 117. Trial court erred in admission of evidence of prior crimes to show intent, preparation and plan; not issues in trial of case. State v. Marquez, 222 Kan. 441, 442, 444, 445, 446, 447, 565 P.2d 245. 118. Evidence properly admitted; identity in issue. State v. Johnson, 222 Kan. 465, 468, 469, 565 P.2d 993. 119. Evidence of other criminal acts is admissible as part of res gestae to prove offenses charged. State v. Ferris, 222 Kan. 515, 516, 565 P.2d 275. 120. Evidence concerning defendant's arrest properly admitted. State v. Gilder, 223 Kan. 220, 228, 574 P.2d 196. 121. Applied; refusal to grant separate trials in prosecution for several alleged crimes not error; conviction affirmed. State v. Howell, 223 Kan. 282, 285, 286, 573 P.2d 1003. 122. Testimony concerning possible offense sufficiently proximate in time and similar in nature admissible; conviction of conspiracy to sell cocaine affirmed. State v. Glazer, 223 Kan. 351, 360, 574 P.2d 942. 123. Kidnapping conviction affirmed; evidence did not warrant giving limited instruction on prior conviction. State v. Dunn, 223 Kan. 545, 549, 575 P.2d 530. 124. Recorded confession of similar crime relevant to identity issue had sufficient value to justify admission. State v. Treadwell, 223 Kan. 577, 581, 575 P.2d 550. 125. Testimony admitted in prosecution for rape and other crimes; prejudicial error in limiting certain evidence; new trial ordered. State v. Nixon, 223 Kan. 788, 790, 576 P.2d 691. 126. Robbery conviction reversed; improper closing argument by prosecutor. State v. Reeves, 224 Kan. 90, 577 P.2d 1175. 127. Video-tape deposition properly admitted to prove identity hereunder but improper to prove plan. State v. Gourley, 224 Kan. 167, 169, 170, 578 P.2d 713. 128. Cited; evidence of other offenses; conviction affirmed. State v. McGee, 224 Kan. 173, 175, 578 P.2d 269. 129. Record examined on appeal from murder conviction; admission of other crime evidence held harmless error. State v. McCorgary, 224 Kan. 677, 684, 685, 686, 585 P.2d 1024. 130. Court did not abuse discretion in admitting evidence of earlier, similar offense. State v. Murrell, 224 Kan. 689, 695, 585 P.2d 1017. 131. Admission of evidence of defendant's prior conviction of burglary in California not prejudicial error; identity. State v. McBarron, 224 Kan. 710, 713, 585 P.2d 1041. 132. No prejudicial error in admission of evidence of prior misconduct. State v. White & Stewart, 225 Kan. 87, 100, 587 P.2d 1259. 133. Evidence of prior crime properly admitted; conviction of minor as an adult under K.S.A. 21-3401 affirmed. State v. Cox, 225 Kan. 143, 145, 146, 587 P.2d 890. 134. State not limited in its proof in conspiracy trial to overt acts alleged in information. State v. Taylor, 2 Kan. App. 2d 532, 533, 583 P.2d 1033. 135. Mentioned; previous editorials directed toward others not relevant in defamation action. Gleichenhaus v. Carlyle, 3 Kan. App. 2d 146, 148, 591 P.2d 635. 136. Cited; the use of hands to effect strangulation can be used to support an intent to kill; evidence properly admitted. State v. Rupe, 226 Kan. 474, 477, 478, 601 P.2d 675. 137. Admonition to disregard improper evidence cures prejudice; no showing of clear abuse of discretion. State v. McGhee 226 Kan. 698, 702, 602 P.2d 1339. 138. Limiting instruction not required where evidence of other crime is independently admissible to prove crime charged. State v. Marks, 226 Kan. 704, 717, 602 P.2d 1344. 139. Error not to give instruction limiting use of evidence of prior conviction, regardless of whether requested. State v. Whitehead, 226 Kan. 719, 721, 722, 723, 724, 725, 602 P.2d 1263. 140. Where prior offense offered to prove identity, there must be sufficient similarities to raise reasonable inference that same person committed both offenses. State v. Lomax & Williams, 227 Kan. 651, 653, 608 P.2d 959. 141. Evidence of arrest for conspiracy to sell cocaine not presented or admitted for inadmissible purpose hereunder; conviction for possession upheld. State v. Sabater, 3 Kan. App. 2d 692, 693, 601 P.2d 11. 142. Mentioned in review of Kansas double jeopardy law; prosecution based on acts proved in former prosecution barred by K.S.A. 21-3108(2)(a). In re Berkowitz, 3 Kan. App. 2d 726, 736, 602 P.2d 99. 143. Incumbent on trial court to decide if former conviction is relevant to prove one of specific factors of proof in statute. State v. Brown, 4 Kan. App. 2d 729, 731, 610 P.2d 655. 144. Admission of mug book photograph altered to conceal writing and numbers on its face was not prejudicial as placing defendant's character in evidence. State v. Mack, 228 Kan. 83, 87, 612 P.2d 158. 145. Acts done or declarations made before, during or after the happening of principal occurrence may be admissible as part of the res gestae independent of statute. State v. McDaniel & Owens, 228 Kan. 172, 176, 177, 612 P.2d 1231. 146. Does not apply to witness in criminal case other than accused. State v. Bryant, 228 Kan. 239, 240, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 613 P.2d 1348. 147. Evidence inadmissible hereunder may be admissible under K.S.A. 60-458; cross-examination of expert witness held proper. State v. Dargatz, 228 Kan. 322, 330, 614 P.2d 430. 148. Trial court order excluding other crimes evidence not an order suppressing evidence; appellate court has no jurisdiction to hear appeal by state. State v. Boling, 5 Kan. App. 2d 371, 372, 617 P.2d 102. 149. Prior offense, without conviction, admissible in showing motive and intent; trial court properly balanced probative value v. possible prejudice. State v. Myrick & Nelms, 228 Kan. 406, 419, 421, 616 P.2d 1066. 150. Trial court committed reversible error in allowing cross-examination of defendant on prior conviction; conviction reversed. State v. Quick, 229 Kan. 117, 119, 120, 122, 621 P.2d 997. 151. Admission of evidence of prior personal assaults and batteries against wife held proper. State v. Patchett, 229 Kan. 163, 166, 621 P.2d 1011. 152. Drug offenses per se do not involve dishonesty or false statement in commission; convictions thereof inadmissible for purpose of impairing credibility. State v. Robinson, Lloyd & Clark, 229 Kan. 301, 308, 624 P.2d 964. 153. Admissibility of other crimes discussed; must be a substantial issue under the evidence. State v. Foster, 229 Kan. 362, 364, 365, 623 P.2d 1360. 154. In cases involving illicit sexual relations between adult and child, evidence of prior acts of similar nature between same parties is admissible independent of K.S.A. 60-455. State v. Crossman, 229 Kan. 384, 386, 387, 388, 624 P.2d 461. 155. Evidence of misrepresentations made to others are admissible to establish knowledge, motive and intent in fraud actions. U.S.D. No. 490 v. Celotex Corp., 6 Kan. App. 2d 346, 359, 629 P.2d 196 (1981). 156. Court should have instructed jury to disregard questions of prosecutor concerning obviously inadmissible evidence. State v. Thomas, 6 Kan. App. 2d 925, 928, 931, 932, 636 P.2d 807 (1981). 157. Mentioned in considering defendant's objection to late endorsement of witness of prior crime. State v. Jordan, 229 Kan. 558, 559, 629 P.2d 1172 (1981). 158. No error in admitting falsified truck logbooks to show motive, opportunity and knowledge. State v. Folkerts, 229 Kan. 608, 615, 629 P.2d 173 (1981). 159. Evidence of prior crime inadmissible if defendant acquitted and acquittal based on same issue as in current case. State v. Irons, 230 Kan. 138, 139, 630 P.2d 1116 (1981). 160. Trial court properly admitted evidence of prior criminal conduct of codefendant to prove intent. State v. Gowler, 7 Kan. App. 2d 485, 488, 644 P.2d 473 (1982). 161. A witness need not testify in person at a pretrial hearing on motions in limine; conviction affirmed. State v. Wood, 230 Kan. 477, 479, 480, 638 P.2d 908 (1982). 162. Trial court did not abuse discretion by allowing entire tape recording to be played; was admissible as part of the res gestae. State v. Poulos & Perez, 230 Kan. 512, 513, 639 P.2d 477 (1982). 163. Disposition or propensity to commit a crime is not a material fact for which other crimes evidence is admissible. State v. Carty, 231 Kan. 282, 287, 289, 644 P.2d 407 (1982). 164. Failure to present witness familiar with prior offense to give evidence to show identities or similarities of it and the currently charged offense was error but not prejudicial to defendant. State v. Churchill, 231 Kan. 408, 414, 416, 646 P.2d 1049 (1982). 165. Cited in upholding provision in drug paraphernalia law making relevant prior convictions of defendant under controlled substance law. Kansas Retail Trade Cooperative v. Stephan, 522 F. Supp. 632, 641 (1981). 166. Prosecution based on act of which evidence admitted hereunder barred under K.S.A. 21-3108. State v. Mahlandt, 231 Kan. 665, 666, 647 P.2d 1307 (1982). 167. No trial court error in admitting testimony elicited to show witness bias or prejudice. State v. Loveland, 8 Kan. App. 2d 196, 199, 653 P.2d 472 (1982). 168. A limiting instruction is not required when evidence is admissible independently of this statute to establish a relationship of the parties and not to prove distinct offenses. State v. Green, 232 Kan. 116, 120, 121, 122, 123, 652 P.2d 697 (1982). 169. Evidence of prior crimes to determine defendant's identity, preparation and opportunity held properly admitted. State v. Shepherd, 232 Kan. 614, 617, 657 P.2d 1112 (1983). 170. No error where defendant's counsel on cross-examination invited testimony showing defendant's abusive relationship with deceased wife. State v. Kendig, 233 Kan. 890, 895, 666 P.2d 684 (1983). 171. Evidence of marital discord admissible in case of marital homicide independent of statute. State v. Knapp, 234 Kan. 170, 178, 671 P.2d 520 (1983). 172. Where defendant's testimony goes beyond bounds of statutory protection he foregoes the protection of such statute. State v. Chatmon, 234 Kan. 197, 203, 671 P.2d 531 (1983). 173. Prior crime for purposes of proving identity need only be similar, not identical. State v. Williams, 234 Kan. 233, 234, 670 P.2d 1348 (1983). 174. Conditions or basis for admission, independent of statute, of evidence of prior incidents considered. State v. Reeves, 234 Kan. 250, 255, 671 P.2d 553 (1983). 175. Evidence of prior acts between defendant and victim admissible independent hereof; discordant marital relationship resulting in homicide such a case. State v. Taylor, 234 Kan. 401, 407, 408, 673 P.2d 1140 (1983). 176. Three-part test for admissibility discussed; no error in admitting evidence of other insufficient funds checks. State v. McConnell, 9 Kan. App. 2d 688, 693, 688 P.2d 1224 (1984). 177. Evidence of independent offense may possess evidentiary value to show offense in question and be admissible independent hereof. State v. Maxwell, 10 Kan. App. 2d 62, 67, 691 P.2d 1316 (1984). 178. Where evidence is admissible showing preparation and plan, it may also be admissible independent of statute. State v. Gray, 235 Kan. 632, 634, 681 P.2d 669 (1984). 179. Prior conviction clearly showing identity and intent properly admitted. State v. Boan, 235 Kan. 800, 807, 686 P.2d 160 (1984). 180. If prior convictions involving dishonesty not mentioned on direct, state could not have cross-examined on LSD conviction. State v. Logan, 236 Kan. 79, 83, 689 P.2d 778 (1984). 181. Probative value of prior conviction and past sexual conduct outweighed prejudicial effect; identity and intent similar. State v. Hanks, 236 Kan. 524, 529, 530, 694 P.2d 407 (1985). 182. Question reserved merely attacking adverse decision on evidentiary question does not meet standard of statewide interest. State v. Brown, 236 Kan. 800, 802, 696 P.2d 954 (1985). 183. Contemporaneous statement by deceased about incident two weeks before crime held part of res gestae; not subject hereto. State v. Peterson, 236 Kan. 821, 827, 829, 696 P.2d 387 (1985). 184. With 175 citations in K.S.A., facts of case do not call for further statutory interpretation on state appeal. State v. Holland, 236 Kan. 840, 841, 696 P.2d 401 (1985). 185. Admissibility of separate incident as part of res gestae discussed. State v. Peck, 237 Kan. 756, 762, 703 P.2d 781 (1985). 186. Evidence of similar prior crime relevant to show intent; may also be only method to prove some elements of crime. State v. Gardner, 10 Kan. App. 2d 408, 415, 416, 701 P.2d 703 (1985). 187. Evidence of prior incidents admissible independent of K.S.A. 60-455 to establish relationships, continuing course of conduct or corroborate testimony. State v. Mogenson, 10 Kan. App. 2d 470, 472, 701 P.2d 1339 (1985). 188. Erroneous admission of crime under one exception not made harmless by fact admissible under another exception not instructed on. State v. Perrigo, 10 Kan. App. 2d 651, 652, 708 P.2d 987 (1985). 189. Where accident investigating officers determined alcohol not contributing factor, court properly refused evidence of smell as being prejudicial. Ratteree v. Bartlett, 238 Kan. 11, 18, 707 P.2d 1063 (1985). 190. Where evidence is part of res gestae and admissible independently hereof, no limiting instruction required. State v. Kee, 238 Kan. 342, 347, 711 P.2d 746 (1985). 191. Admissibility to be determined prior to trial outside presence of jury; three-pronged standard applied. State v. Breazeale, 238 Kan. 714, 719, 714 P.2d 1356 (1986). 192. Cited; failure to advise about expungement rights (K.S.A. 21-4619) and appeal rights (K.S.A. 38-1681) when defendant no longer "juvenile offender" (K.S.A. 38-1602(b)(3)) examined. Reubke v. State, 11 Kan. App. 2d 353, 354, 720 P.2d 1141 (1986). 193. Proper criteria applied in allowing testimony from accomplice on prior crimes. State v. Sanford, 237 Kan. 312, 313, 699 P.2d 506 (1985). 194. Evidence of subsequent out-state crime admissible to prove identity where sufficient similarity shown. State v. Bell, 239 Kan. 229, 237, 718 P.2d 628 (1986). 195. Cited; motive for murder following theft to prevent identification and probation revocation for earlier crimes examined. State v. Ruebke, 240 Kan. 493, 502, 731 P.2d 842 (1987). 196. Evidence that a person committed a crime in the past is not admissible as inference that person committed subsequent crime. State v. Clements, 241 Kan. 77, 83, 84, 88, 734 P.2d 1096 (1987). 197. Excluding evidence of events subsequent to arrest proper, but K.S.A. 60-455 incorrect statute. State v. Hunter, 241 Kan. 629, 634, 740 P.2d 559 (1987). 198. Cited; admissibility of prior sexual relations independent of statute, limiting instructions discussed. State v. Moore, 242 Kan. 1, 8, 748 P.2d 833 (1987). 199. Cited; res gestae as not requiring limiting instructions noted. State v. Redford, 242 Kan. 658, 665, 750 P.2d 1013 (1988). 200. Knowledge, intent or absence of mistake do not constitute element of subsequent offense under K.S.A. 21-4619(f)(4). State v. Riedel, 242 Kan. 834, 835, 752 P.2d 115 (1988). 201. Evidence of prior narcotics convictions and testimony concerning circumstances to show knowledge, intent and absence of mistake or accident examined. State v. Graham, 244 Kan. 194, 196, 768 P.2d 259 (1989). 202. Introduction of prior crimes for limited purposes of intent and identity examined. State v. Nunn, 244 Kan. 207, 212, 768 P.2d 268 (1989). 203. Cited where right to speedy trial and use of expert testimony regarding psychology and treatability of sexual offenders examined. State v. Clements, 244 Kan. 411, 412, 770 P.2d 447 (1989). 204. Evidence of prior convictions involving forgery on same checking account examined. State v. Saeger, 13 Kan. App. 2d 723, 727, 779 P.2d 37 (1989). 205. Statements improperly admitted not grounds for reversal unless inconsistent with substantial justice (K.S.A. 60-261); failure to object to hearsay examined. State v. Young, 14 Kan. App. 2d 21, 36, 37, 784 P.2d 366 (1989). 206. Factors to consider in ruling upon admission of evidence of prior crime or civil wrong examined. State v. Smith, 245 Kan. 381, 389, 781 P.2d 666 (1989). 207. While admitting evidence of defendant's parole status may be error, only reversible when denial of substantial justice (K.S.A. 60-261) occurs. State v. Hartfield, 245 Kan. 431, 439, 440, 781 P.2d 1050 (1989). 208. Admissibility of prior illicit sexual relations of similar nature with victim, prior crimes with one other than victim examined. State v. Damewood, 245 Kan. 676, 679, 783 P.2d 1249 (1989). 209. Admission of testimony from prior prosecution resulting in acquittal barred by constitutional collateral estoppel doctrine; habeas relief warranted. Buck v. Maschner, 878 F.2d 344 (1989). 210. Circumstances permitting admissions of other crimes evidence examined; acquittal or mistrial on other crimes does not bar use. State v. Searles, 246 Kan. 567, 577, 793 P.2d 724 (1990). 211. Factors for ruling on admissibility of other crimes, trial court's discretion on timing of limiting instructions examined. State v. Hall, 246 Kan. 728, 738, 793 P.2d 737 (1990). 212. Defendant's obligation to specify objection to admission of evidence to preserve it for appeal stated. State v. Skelton, 247 Kan. 34, 44, 795 P.2d 349 (1990). 213. No limiting instruction on other crimes evidence required when evidence admissible independent of statute. State v. Wilson, 247 Kan. 87, 97, 795 P.2d 336 (1990). 214. Evidence of prior acts of similar nature between the parties admissible independent of statute; relationship and continuing course of conduct shown. State v. Jones, 247 Kan. 537, 547, 802 P.2d 533 (1990). 215. Factors to be considered by trial court in ruling upon admissibility of evidence of prior civil wrongs examined. Brunett v. Albrecht, 248 Kan. 634, 638, 810 P.2d 276 (1991). 216. Admissibility in murder trial of prior acts of violence between defendant and victim/wife examined. State v. Hedger, 248 Kan. 815, 818, 811 P.2d 1170 (1991). 217. Evidence of prior crimes to establish relationship between parties is admissible independent of K.S.A. 60-455. State v. Dunn, 249 Kan. 488, 493, 820 P.2d 412 (1991). 218. Test for determining admissibility of evidence of prior conviction; appellate review. State v. Blackmore, 249 Kan. 668, 670, 822 P.2d 49 (1991). 219. Evidence of a prior crime was admissible. State v. Jordan, 250 Kan. 180, 190, 191, 825 P.2d 157 (1992). 220. Principles for admission of prior crimes evidence discussed and applied. State v. Mason, 250 Kan. 393, 402, 404, 827 P.2d 748 (1992). 221. Evidence of membership in a gang is admissible since neither a crime nor civil wrong is involved. State v. Bailey, 251 Kan. 156, 166, 834 P.2d 342 (1992). 222. Evidence bearing on drug conspiracy to which defendant had pled, and illegal drug activities in Kansas and elsewhere held admissible. State v. Tyler, 251 Kan. 616, 633, 840 P.2d 413 (1992). 223. Admission of gang membership evidence in trial of juvenile as adult (K.S.A. 38-1636) examined. State v. Hooks, 251 Kan. 755, 765, 840 P.2d 483 (1992). 224. Evidence of prior incident to show opportunity admitted (related first-degree murder case where bodies of victims never found). State v. Grissom, 251 Kan. 851, 921, 840 P.2d 1142 (1992). 225. Testimony regarding attempt to send cash via federal express not within purview of statute. State v. Humphrey, 252 Kan. 6, 28, 845 P.2d 592 (1992). 226. Court's allowing prosecutor to refer in opening statement to deaths of defendant's other children and permitting evidence at trial. State v. Lumbrera, 252 Kan. 54, 69, 845 P.2d 609 (1992). 227. Prior crimes showing general method used to entice young victims indicated common approach tantamount to a plan. State v. Clements, 252 Kan. 86, 90, 843 P.2d 679 (1992). 228. Evidence of gang membership admitted as relevant and part of the res gestae. State v. Walker, 252 Kan. 117, 135, 137, 843 P.2d 203 (1992). 229. Whether testimony of state's witnesses met three-prong test on admitting evidence of prior crimes examined. State v. Maggard, 16 Kan. App. 2d 743, 750, 829 P.2d 691 (1992). 230. Evidence admitted or used to counter expert opinion under K.S.A. 60-447 and not for any purpose hereunder needs no limiting instruction. State v. Cramer, 17 Kan. App. 2d 623, 628, 841 P.2d 1111 (1992). 231. Section applies only to defendants not witnesses. Haislip v. Roberts, 788 F. Supp. 482, 485 (1992). 232. Admission of testimony that defendant had on previous occasions physically abused victim examined. State v. Young, 253 Kan. 28, 34, 852 P.2d 510 (1993). 233. Admissibility of prior crimes evidence examined. State v. Synoracki, 253 Kan. 59, 853 P.2d 24 (1993). 234. Where separate but similar criminal charges tried together, evidence material to each admissible independent of K.S.A. 60-455. State v. Cromwell, 253 Kan. 495, 509, 856 P.2d 1299 (1993). 235. Whether witness' statement implicating defendant was overwhelmingly prejudicial when weighed against probative value examined. State v. Green, 254 Kan. 669, 684, 867 P.2d 366 (1994). 236. Whether admission of evidence of similar bad act deprived defendant of a fair trial examined. State v. Mack, 255 Kan. 21, 29, 871 P.2d 1265 (1994). 237. Whether witness' statements should have been excluded because probative value outweighed by prejudicial effect examined; whether admission of evidence of similar act deprived defendant of a fair trial examined. State v. Johnson, 255 Kan. 140, 152, 871 P.2d 1246 (1994). 238. Whether evidence of defendant's prior crimes was relevant to prove disputed material facts examined. State v. Timley, 255 Kan. 286, 303, 875 P.2d 242 (1994). 239. Whether admission of defendant's pending drug charges was abuse of discretion examined. State v. Peckham, 255 Kan. 310, 328, 875 P.2d 257 (1994). 240. Whether evidence of other crimes were admissible as res gestae and required a limiting instruction examined. State v. Baker, 255 Kan. 680, 686, 877 P.2d 946 (1994). 241. Whether court erred by denying defendant the opportunity to cross-examine witness regarding prior bad acts examined. State v. Rowell, 256 Kan. 200, 210, 883 P.2d 1184 (1994). 242. Whether admission of testimony regarding defendant and victim engaging in sexual bondage is governed by section examined. State v. Sexton, 256 Kan. 344, 349, 886 P.2d 811 (1994). 243. Whether evidence of a prior crime admitted to prove intent on indecent liberties charge is reversible error examined. State v. Dotson, 256 Kan. 406, 412, 886 P.2d 356 (1994). 244. Whether murder victim's statements are admissible as res gestae examined. State v. Gadelkarim, 256 Kan. 671, 689, 887 P.2d 88 (1994). 245. Whether limiting jury instruction regarding defendant's knowledge of illegal acts was error examined. State v. McGraw, 19 Kan. App. 2d 1001, 1004, 879 P.2d 1147 (1994). 246. Whether admission of references to prior spousal abuse denied defendant the right to a fair trial examined. State v. Gibbons, 256 Kan. 951, 960, 889 P.2d 772 (1995). 247. Whether court abused discretion by admitting evidence of two prior murder convictions in murder trial examined. State v. Lumbrera, 257 Kan. 144, 150, 891 P.2d 1096 (1995). 248. Evidence of contact between victim and defendant before crime admissible as res gestae. State v. Spresser, 257 Kan. 664, 667, 896 P.2d 1005 (1995). 249. Trial court's denial of defendant's motion for separate trials on multiple similar charges not an abuse of discretion. State v. Hill, 257 Kan. 774, 781, 895 P.2d 1238 (1995). 250. Trial court has discretion to admit evidence of relevant nonviolent marital discord in marital homicide case. State v. Haddock, 257 Kan. 964, 980, 897 P.2d 152 (1995). 251. Probative value of prior robbery convictions outweighed prejudicial effect; intent and identity similar. State v. Swafford, 257 Kan. 1023, 1041, 897 P.2d 1027 (1995). 251a. Whether court erred by admitting evidence of prior crimes and wrong doing examined. State v. Eastridge, 20 Kan. App. 2d 973, 982, 894 P.2d 243 (1995). 252. Evidence of prior crime admissible for witness credibility purposes; failure to give limiting instruction upheld. State v. Humphrey, 258 Kan. 351, 363, 367, 905 P.2d 664 (1995). 253. Trial court's failure to give instruction limiting use of prior crimes evidence held harmless error. State v. Denney, 258 Kan. 437, 443, 905 P.2d 657 (1995). 254. Erroneous admission of prior crime for purpose of proving identity constituted harmless error. State v. Richmond, 258 Kan. 449, 459, 904 P.2d 974 (1995). 255. Erroneous admission of testimony and jury instruction concerning gang membership held harmless error. State v. Cox, 258 Kan. 557, 566, 908 P.2d 603 (1995). 256. Deceased victim's statements regarding marital abuse relevant to show past conduct of accused. State v. Cheeks, 258 Kan. 581, 587, 908 P.2d 175 (1995). 257. Evidence testified to by police chief that vehicle used in murder was stolen admissible as res gestae. State v. Vincent, 258 Kan. 694, 700, 908 P.2d 619 (1995). 258. No error in court admitting evidence of prior marijuana convictions to prove intent to possess. State v. Likins, 21 Kan. App. 2d 420, 430, 903 P.2d 764 (1995). 259. Defendant not denied fair trial because of cumulative trial error. State v. Allison, 259 Kan. 25, 37, 910 P.2d 817 (1996). 260. Evidence of prior actions of gang are admissible independent of section because section only applies to defendants. State v. Harris, 259 Kan. 689, 915 P.2d 758 (1996). 261. Evidence of prior bad act between drug dealer and customer admissible to prove identity. State v. Prosper, 21 Kan. App. 2d 956, 957, 910 P.2d 859 (1996). 262. Introduction of defendant's prior criminal incidents did not constitute prosecutorial misconduct. State v. Crane, 260 Kan. 208, 229, 918 P.2d 1256 (1996). 263. Admission of evidence of defendant's previous self-assessment of veracity not an abuse of discretion. State v. Webber, 260 Kan. 263, 277, 918 P.2d 609 (1996). 264. Trial court error in admitting evidence of prior drug sales did not constitute reversible error. State v. Prosper, 260 Kan. 743, 747, 926 P.2d 231 (1996). 265. Evidence of past legal participation in sexual act performed on rape victim by defendant not governed by section. State v. Gaines, 260 Kan. 752, 767, 926 P.2d 641 (1996). 266. Trial court's admission of prior crimes evidence was not an abuse of discretion. State v. Acree, 22 Kan. App. 2d 350, 357, 916 P.2d 71 (1996). 267. Admissibility of board of healing arts findings are determined by section's balancing test. Shirley v. Smith, 22 Kan. App. 2d 424, 425, 916 P.2d 730 (1996). 268. Probative value of defendant's police line-up photograph outweighed prejudicial value. State v. Roberts, 261 Kan. 320, 328, 931 P.2d 683 (1997). 269. Prior statements of defendant and evidence of discordant relationship between defendant and victim admissible. State v. Clark, 261 Kan. 460, 470, 931 P.2d 664 (1997). 270. Cited in discussion concerning defense counsel's lack of awareness of section for ineffective counsel purposes. State v. Rice, 261 Kan. 567, 604, 932 P.2d 981 (1997). 271. Evidence of public censure of doctor for providing false information in unrelated matter inadmissible in malpractice suit. Shirley v. Smith, 261 Kan. 685, 696, 933 P.2d 651 (1997). 272. A pretrial motion in limine does not eliminate the requirement of a timely objection to preserve an issue on appeal. State v. Ordway, 261 Kan. 776, 796, 797, 934 P.2d 94 (1997). 273. Defendant responsible for having sidebar conference recorded; admissibility issue not on record not preserved for review. State v. Moncla, 262 Kan. 58, 66, 936 P.2d 727 (1997). 274. Gang membership alone not a crime or civil wrong; evidence thereof not inadmissible hereunder. State v. Sims, 262 Kan. 165, 170, 936 P.2d 779 (1997). 275. Requirements for admission of prior crimes evidence hereunder reviewed; admission as proof of identity, intent or knowledge proper. State v. Lane, 262 Kan. 373, 387, 940 P.2d 422 (1997). 276. Requirements for admission hereunder reviewed; no abuse of discretion even though no specific finding regarding probative value. State v. Mitchell, 262 Kan. 434, 440, 939 P.2d 879 (1997). 277. Probative value of evidence of guns and drugs seized from defendant outweighed prejudice to defendant. State v. Lee, 263 Kan. 97, 104, 948 P.2d 641 (1997). 278. Trial court ruling excluding evidence of alleged prior neglect of child-victim by defendant's wife upheld. State v. Williams, 263 Kan. 134, 141, 947 P.2d 25 (1997). 279. Trial court did not abuse discretion by admitting limited evidence of defendant's ownership of knives. State v. Dias, 263 Kan. 331, 337, 949 P.2d 1093 (1997). 280. Evidence that defendant was on probation at time of alleged crime properly admitted as rebuttal evidence. State v. Thompkins, 263 Kan. 602, 622, 952 P.2d 1338 (1998). 281. Trial court ruling concerning use of out-of-state uncounseled plea conviction to enhance sentence reversed and remanded. Graham v. State, 263 Kan. 742, 743, 745, 952 P.2d 1266 (1998). 282. Evidence of prior conduct admissible in sexually violent predator proceeding independent of section's prohibitions. In re Care & Treatment of Hay, 263 Kan. 822, 836, 953 P.2d 666 (1998). 283. Erroneous admission of evidence of drugs seized a week after arrest did not constitute reversible error. State v. Edwards, 264 Kan. 177, 199, 955 P.2d 1276 (1998). 284. Admission of crimes committed by defendant in preparation for charged crime of robbery upheld. State v. Mims, 264 Kan. 506, 511, 956 P.2d 1337 (1998). 285. Admission of evidence of prior child abuse in murder and abuse of child case not an abuse of discretion. State v. Heath, 264 Kan. 557, 578, 957 P.2d 449 (1998). 286. Trial court denial of limiting instruction on evidence of defendant's prior crimes upheld. State v. Higgenbotham, 264 Kan. 593, 605, 957 P.2d 416 (1998). 287. Defendant's failure to timely object to gang affiliation evidence precluded appellate review. State v. Sims, 265 Kan. 166, 176, 960 P.2d 1271 (1998). 288. Evidence of prior discipline of children admitted independent hereof to establish relationship of parties not abuse of trial court's discretion. State v. Carr, 265 Kan. 608, 609, 624, 625, 963 P.2d 421 (1998). 289. Discretion not abused in joinder of murder charges; evidence material to each crime admissible independent hereof. State v. Barksdale, 266 Kan. 498, 510, 973 P.2d 165 (1999). 290. Evidence of present crime introduced hereunder in prior prosecution; dismissal on double jeopardy grounds under K.S.A. 21-3108(2)(a) upheld. State v. Barnhart, 266 Kan. 541, 542, 548, 972 P.2d 1106 (1999). 291. Trial court's limitation of cross examination of bargaining witness to avoid jeopardizing another case not abuse of discretion. State v. Lyons, 266 Kan. 591, 600, 973 P.2d 794 (1999). 292. In prosecution of aggravated liberties with a child evidence of prior crimes admissible to show a common approach that is tantamount to a plan. State v. Tiffany, 267 Kan. 495, 498, 502, 986 P.2d 1064 (1999). 293. Evidence of earlier sexual abuse of older daughter properly admitted; striking similarity in manner of abuse. State v. Rucker, 267 Kan. 816, 824, 829, 987 P.2d 1080 (1999). 294. Admission of prior bad acts against some defendants with limiting instruction did not prejudice defendants. State v. Smith, 268 Kan. 222, 235, 993 P.2d 1213 (1999). 295. Evidence of specific incidents of threats and violence by defendant toward witness not admitted by court based on lack of evidence of ongoing violent relationship between parties. State v. Campbell, 268 Kan. 529, 997 P.2d 726 (2000). 296. Evidence of defendant striking wife five years before present offense not error when other factors of present offense are considered. State v. Simkins, 269 Kan. 84, 3 P.3d 1274 (2000). 297. Evidence of gang membership is not a crime or civil wrong and is admissible if relevant. State v. Jamison, 269 Kan. 564, 7 P.3d 1204 (2000). 298. No abuse of discretion in court's admission of evidence of another murder committed by defendant. State v. Higgenbotham, 271 Kan. 582, 23 P.3d 874 (2001). 299. Primary test is relevancy for admission of evidence independent of K.S.A. 60-455. State v. Wimbley, 271 Kan. 843, 26 P.3d 657 (2001). 300. Admission of evidence in child in need of care proceeding controlled by specific statute, K.S.A. 38-1583a, rather than more general statute, K.S.A. 60-455. In re R.B.S., 29 Kan. App. 2d 1023, 36 P.3d 300 (2001). 301. Evidence of prior crimes admitted; upward durational departure sentence vacated because of holding in Gould. State v. Boorigie, 273 Kan. 18, 41 P.3d 764 (2002). 302. Prior criminal acts of defendant properly admitted in prosecution of felony murder. State v. Tolson, 274 Kan. 558, 56 P.3d 279 (2002). 303. Evidence of prior crime admissible independent of section. State v. Spurlock, 30 Kan. App. 2d 921, 52 P.3d 371 (2002). 304. Limiting instruction should be given when admitting evidence of other crimes, however, no error if evidence is admissible independent of section. State v. Gibson, 30 Kan. App. 2d 937, 52 P.3d 339 (2002). 305. In prosecution for rape and aggravated indecent liberties, court properly admitted prior uncharged acts of similar nature as part of defendant's plan. State v. McHenry, 276 Kan. 513, 78 P.3d 403 (2003). 306. Evidence of gang affiliation only admissible where there is sufficient proof that such membership is related to crime charged. State v. Lowe, 276 Kan. 957, 80 P.3d 1156 (2003). 307. Erroneous admission of K.S.A. 60-455 evidence not harmless; convictions reversed. State v. Davidson, 31 Kan. App. 2d 372, 65 P.3d 1078 (2003). 308. Error to admit prior conviction for indecent liberties to show plan of defendant. State v. Jones, 277 Kan. 413, 85 P.3d 1226 (2004). 309. Evidence of prior crime of aggravated indecent liberties with child under 14 years of age not admissible to show intent but admissible to show plan or modus operandi. State v. Kackley, 32 Kan. App. 2d 927, 92 P.3d 1128 (2004). 310. Conduct of defendant with one middle school girl is admissible to show modus operandi of defendant in prosecution involving another girl. State v. Overton, 279 Kan. 547, 112 P.3d 244 (2005). 311. Evidence of prior conviction for possessing controlled substance is admissible in prosecution for possession of marijuana. State v. Castillo, 34 Kan. App. 2d 169, 115 P.3d 787 (2005). 312. Requirement for joinder will not be raised to the higher requirements for admission of evidence under K.S.A. 60-455. State v. Bunyard, 281 Kan. 392, 400, 133 P.3d 14 (2006). 313. Evidence that gang committed illegal acts was violation of prohibition on introduction of prior crimes evidence. State v. Goodson, 281 Kan. 913, 135 P.3d 1116 (2006). 314. Testimony that defendant's name was mentioned during a police investigation was not evidence of a prior crime. State v. Tatum, 281 Kan. 1098, 1110, 135 P.3d 1088 (2006). 315. Evidence of gang affiliation or association is not evidence of a prior crime or civil wrong. State v. Winston, 281 Kan. 1114, 1135, 135 P.3d 1072 (2006). 316. List of material facts listed in the statute not exclusive; admissibility of any and all other crimes and civil wrongs governed by the statute. State v. Gunby, 282 Kan. 39, 56, 57, 144 P.3d 647 (2006). 317. Court no longer recognizes res gestae as independent basis for admissibility; trial court's admission of unredacted videotaped interview on this ground constituted abuse of discretion. State v. Gonzalea, 282 Kan. 73, 98, 145 P.3d 18 (2006). 318. Eviction and restraining order do not qualify as evidence of other crimes or civil wrongs committed by defendant. State v. Anthony, 282 Kan. 201, 214, 145 P.3d 1 (2006). 319. Admission of defendant's prior convictions to show his intent to exert control over controlled substances proper. State v. Adams, 35 Kan. App. 2d 439, 446, 131 P.3d 556 (2006). 320. Insufficient similarity between victims' disappearance and death and alleged prior bad act to be admissible. State v. Horton, 283 Kan. 44, 54, 151 P.3d 9 (2007). 321. Statute does not prevent joinder under K.S.A. 22-3202. State v. Gaither, 283 Kan. 671, 688, 156 P.3d 602 (2007). 322. Admissibility of other crimes governed by K.S.A. 60-455, when other crimes admissible discussed. State v. Walters, 284 Kan. 1, 13, 159 P.3d 174 (2007). 323. Court discusses whether a limiting instruction is required when evidence of gang activity admitted. State v. Conway, 284 Kan. 37, 48, 49, 159 P.3d 917 (2007). 324. Court discusses when defendant's prior convictions may be used for impeachment. State v. Woolverton, 284 Kan. 59, 64, 65, 159 P.3d 985 (2007). 325. Evidence of prior crimes permitted to show intent and identity in subsequent prosecution. State v. Garcia, 285 Kan. 1, 169 P.3d 1069 (2007). 326. Prior protection from stalking orders admissible under the circumstances. Wentland v. Uhlarik, 37 Kan. App. 2d 734, 740, 159 P.3d 1035 (2007). 327. Evidence of prior crime or wrong held inadmissible to prove defendant's plan; requirements discussed. State v. Dayhuff, 37 Kan. App. 2d 779, 783, 785, 787, 158 P.3d 330 (2007). 328. Evidence of other crimes admissible to prove a disputed material fact such as motive, intent, preparation or knowledge. State v. Hampton, 38 Kan. App. 2d 209, 211, 162 P.3d 840 (2007). 329. Identity theft case; evidence admissible to question of whether defendant used information in violation of statutes. State v. Meza, 38 Kan. App. 2d 245, 252, 253, 165 P.3d 298 (2007). 330. Cited; trial court erred by admitting evidence independent of K.S.A. 60-455; harmless error. State v. Elrod, 38 Kan. App. 2d 453, 166 P.3d 1067 (2007). 331. Trial court erred in admitting prior crime evidence to show intent, knowledge and absence of mistake or accident. State v. Boggs, 38 Kan. App. 2d 683, 686, 687, 688, 690, 691, 170 P.3d 912 (2007). 332. In case involving misjoinder issue, a K.S.A. 60-455 analysis is relevant tool in determining whether prejudice results. State v. Coburn, 38 Kan. App. 2d 1036, 1051-1053, 1059, 176 P.3d 203 (2008). 333. Court has never held that limiting instruction required in cases involving post-arrest silence. State v. Murray, 285 Kan. 503, 527, 530, 532, 533, 174 P.3d 407 (2008). 334. Evidence of other crimes or civil wrongs is not admissible if not relevant to prove a disputed fact. State v. Ventris, 285 Kan. 595, 608-610, 176 P.3d 938 (2008). 335. Cited in case involving upward departure sentence from presumptive probation sentencing guidelines. State v. Martin, 285 Kan. 735, 741, 175 P.3d 832 (2008). 336. District court abused its discretion in denying a hearing on defendant's newly discovered evidence claims. Moncla v. State, 285 Kan. 826, 835, 836, 176 P.3d 954 (2008). 337. Opinion or inferences of lay witness admissible if judge finds they may be rationally based on witness' perception. State v. Hunt, 285 Kan. 855, 856, 874, 176 P.3d 183 (2008). 338. No reversible error in admitting evidence of firing for stealing and no limiting instruction. State v. Reid, 286 Kan. 494, 497, 502, 503, 505, 508-511, 513, 186 P.3d 713 (2008). 339. Cited; evidence of prior crimes and civil wrongs improperly admitted; harmless error. State v. Warledo, 286 Kan. 927, 939-944, 190 P.3d 937 (2008). 340. Cited; alleged error in admitting evidence of drug use and addiction; no limiting instruction was error. State v. Carapezza, 286 Kan. 992, 998, 1001, 1002, 191 P.3d 256 (2008). 341. Cited; evidence of defendant's drug use found probative of motive; lack of limiting instruction erroneous but harmless. State v. Hughes, 286 Kan. 1010, 1020, 1021, 1024, 191 P.3d 268 (2008). 342. Cited; no error found about the introduction of evidence of uncharged crimes and other bad acts. State v. Cook, 286 Kan. 1098, 1109, 1110, 191 P.3d 294 (2008). 343. Cited; prior use of marijuana evidence held improper to prove intent to possess under facts of case. State v. Boggs, 287 Kan. 298, 299, 302, 304, 307-311, 314, 317, 318, 197 P.3d 441 (2008). 344. Cited; evidence of surgeon's past surgeries held inadmissible in medical malpractice action. Kelly v. VanZant, 287 Kan. 509, 512, 197 P.3d 803 (2008). 345. Evidence of prior rape held admissible to show plan or modus operandi. State v. Smith, 39 Kan. App. 2d 204, 205, 213, 178 P.3d 672 (2008). 346. District court erred in failing to conduct an analysis of prior conviction evidence under K.S.A. 60-455; evidence found admissible. State v. Moore, 39 Kan. App. 2d 568, 570, 573, 583, 181 P.3d 1258 (2008). 347. Provisions of K.S.A. 60-455 inapplicable to commitment proceedings under Kansas sexually violent predator act. In re Care and Treatment of Colt, 39 Kan. App. 2d 643, 645-650, 183 P.3d 4 (2008). 348. Cited; no error in admitting evidence relating to aggravating factor of fiduciary relationship with victim. State v. Horn, 40 Kan. App. 2d 687, 703, 704, 196 P.3d 379 (2008). 349. Cited; to preserve a K.S.A. 60-455 issue for appeal, defendant must object on that ground at trial. State v. Morris, 40 Kan. App. 2d 769, 776-779, 196 P.3d 422 (2008). 350. Cited; in case involving extrajudicial evidence by juror, no new trial ordered on that basis. State v. Johnson, 40 Kan. App. 2d 1059, 1067, 1068, 198 P.3d 769 (2008). 351. Cited; error in admitting evidence of prior bad acts to prove intent, absence of mistake or accident and plan. State v. Prine, 287 Kan. 713-715, 717, 721-725, 727, 728, 730, 733-737, 200 P.3d 1 (2009). 352. Cited; protection from abuse order against defendant, no clear error found in admitting evidence thereof. State v. Jones, 40 Kan. App. 2d 1146, 1156-1158, 201 P.3d 710 (2009). 353. Alleged error in admitting evidence under K.S.A. 60-455 not held to be reversible, no contemporaneous objection. State v. Hoffman, 288 Kan. 100, 200 P.3d 1254 (2009). 354. K.S.A. 60-455 discussed in holding trial court did not abuse discretion in admitting prior bad act evidence. State v. Decker, 288 Kan. 306, 202 P.3d 669 (2009). 355. No error in admission of evidence of prior bad acts or photos of victim. State v. Riojas, 288 Kan. 379, 204 P.3d 578 (2009). 356. Neither K.S.A. 60-455 nor Gunby case governs admission of prior crime evidence in sexually violent predator commitment proceedings. In re Care & Treatment of Miller, 289 Kan. 218, 210 P.3d 625 (2009). 357. Neither K.S.A. 60-455 nor Gunby case govern admission of prior crime evidence in sexually violent predator commitment proceedings. In re Care & Treatment of Colt, 289 Kan. 234, 211 P.3d 797 (2009). 358. District court erred in admitting other crime evidence; admission of such evidence harmless error. State v. Ventris, 289 Kan. 314, 212 P.3d 162 (2009). 359. Appellate court upholds admission of evidence regarding defendant's prior drug dealing to show motive and knowledge. State v. Richmond, 289 Kan. 419, 212 P.3d 165 (2009). 360. No objection under K.S.A. 60-455 to evidence of prior acts. State v. Wilson, 41 Kan. App. 2d 37, 200 P.3d 1283 (2009). 361. Relating to other crime evidence, construed and applied. State v. Blaurock, 41 Kan. App. 2d 178, 201 P.3d 728 (2009). 362. Defendant failed to object to admission of prior bad acts. State v. Herrera, 41 Kan. App. 2d 215, 202 P.3d 68 (2009). 363. Other crimes evidence not objected to at trial, defendant precluded from raising issue on appeal. State v. Deal, 41 Kan. App. 2d 866, 206 P.3d 529 (2009). 364. Admission of prior crime evidence upheld to prove knowledge and intent. State v. Preston, 41 Kan. App. 2d 981, 207 P.3d 1081 (2009). 365. Testimony about uncharged crimes permitted; defendant failed to object. State v. Mendoza, 41 Kan. App. 2d 996, 207 P.3d 1072 (2009). 366. Evidence admitted that defendant watched pornographic movies with child; no error found; no objection at trial. State v. Gaona, 41 Kan. App. 2d 1064, 208 P.3d 308 (2009). 367. District court's admission of evidence of the defendant's prior bad acts constituted reversible error. State v. Wells, 289 Kan. 1219, 221 P.3d 561 (2009). 368. District court's admission of defendant's outstanding warrant proper. State v. Hollingsworth, 289 Kan. 1250, 221 P.3d 1122 (2009). 369. Admissibility of evidence to prove intent and plan analyzed. State v. Brown, 44 Kan. App. 2d 344, 236 P.3d 551 (2010). 370. Defendant's prior drug use evidence admitted; his challenge to the admissibility not preserved for appeal. State v. Marler, 290 Kan. 119, 223 P.3d 804 (2010). 371. Error to give shotgun limiting instruction one of the reasons for reversal of convictions. State v. Magallanez, 290 Kan. 906, 235 P.3d 460 (2010). 372. Defendant precluded from challenging admissibility where there was no timely and specific objection at trial. State v. Hart, 44 Kan. App. 2d 986, 242 P.3d 1230 (2010). 373. Erroneously admitted prior conviction likely prejudiced the jury; conviction reversed. State v. Cook, 45 Kan. App. 2d 468, 249 P.3d 454 (2011). 374. District court did not abuse discretion in finding that the probative value of evidence that defendant was driving on a suspended driver's license outweighed the prejudicial effect. State v. Nye, 46 Kan. App. 2d 182, 261 P.3d 923 (2011). 375. Trial court did not abuse discretion in determining that evidence of defendant's alleged prior sexual abuse of other children was not unduly prejudicial. State v. Inkelaar, 293 Kan. 414, 264 P.3d 81 (2011). 376. District court erred in failing to conduct an analysis before admitting prior crimes evidence; error deemed harmless. State v. Enriquez, 46 Kan. App. 2d 765, 266 P.3d 579 (2011). 377. Defendant's illegal use of a controlled substance is not automatically admissible; error not harmless. State v. Preston, 294 Kan. 27, 272 P.3d 1275 (2012). 378. Admission of plan evidence improper; error held not harmless. State v. Torres, 294 Kan. 135, 273 P.3d 729 (2012). 379. Gang affiliation evidence is not subject to K.S.A. 60-455. State v. Peppers, 294 Kan. 377, 276 P.3d 148 (2012). 380. An overbroad limiting instruction is deemed harmless error if there is no prejudice to the defendant. State v. Wilson, 295 Kan. 605, 289 P.3d 1082 (2012). 381. Prior crime evidence was sufficiently prejudicial to require reversal of the defendant's conviction. State v. Everett, 296 Kan. 1039, 297 P.3d 292 (2013). 382. Evidence to prove plan must be so strikingly similar in pattern or so distinct in method of operation to the current allegations to be a signature. State v. Longstaff, 296 Kan. 884, 299 P.3d 268 (2013). 383. The district judge need not give a limiting jury instruction, when evidence of another act or offense of sexual misconduct is admitted. State v. Prine, 297 Kan. 460, 303 P.3d 662 (2013). 384. Evidence of other crimes and civil wrongs not prohibited if acts were part of events at issue in trial. State v. King, 297 Kan. 955, 305 P.3d 641 (2013). 385. Admission of evidence of the defendant's prior diversion agreement was held proper. State v. Remmert, 298 Kan. 621, 316 P.3d 154 (2014). 386. The district court properly admitted the defendant's prior conviction evidence. State v. Dean, 298 Kan. 1023, 324 P.3d 1023 (2014). 387. When multiple acts jury unanimity is an issue on appeal, the threshold question is whether jurors heard evidence of multiple acts, each of which could have supported conviction on a charged crime. State v. King, 299 Kan. 372, 323 P.3d 1277 (2014). 388. Material facts listed in section are exemplary, not exhaustive, and a party can seek to admit evidence to prove a material fact not enumerated. State v. McCune, 299 Kan. 1216, 1226, 330 P.3d 1107 (2014). 389. Limiting instruction did not require reversal of the defendant's conviction for admission of evidence that defendant used other inmates' PINs to make telephone calls while in jail awaiting trial. State v. Story, 300 Kan. 702, 707, 334 P.3d 297 (2014). 390. Admission into evidence was proper that defendant previously shot gun into air. State v. Richard, 300 Kan. 715, 725, 333 P.3d 179 (2014). 391. A limiting instruction advising the jury it could consider defendant's propensity for sexually abusing victim was harmless error. State v. Moyer, 302 Kan. 892, 916, 360 P.3d 384 (2015). 392. District court did not violate defendant's due process right to a fair trial by admitting evidence of prior crimes when defendant failed to timely object and failed to explain why an exception should be made to the general rule that a constitutional claim may not be raised for the first time on appeal. State v. Willis, 51 Kan. App. 2d 971, 990, 358 P.3d 107 (2015). 393. Prior recorded statements evidencing the commission of other sexual misconduct by defendant was determined admissible as the statements were of probative value and not outweighed by undue prejudice. State v. Dern, 303 Kan. 385, 395, 362 P.3d 566 (2015). 394. Evidence of prior crimes or civil wrongs must also meet the requirements for admissibility prescribed by K.S.A. 60-460 if the evidence also qualifies as hearsay. State v. Seacat, 303 Kan. 622, 633, 366 P.3d 208 (2016). 395. The witness's testimony about comments defendant made moments before he made comments to victim was not "prior bad act evidence." State v. Charles, 304 Kan. 158, 175-176, 372 P.3d 1109 (2016). 396. Past conviction for sexual offenses deemed relevant and admissible to demonstrate propensity. State v. Rodman, 53 Kan. App. 2d 106, 116, 383 P.3d 187 (2016). 397. When considering the probative value of prior acts, a court should evaluate: (1) The similarity of the prior acts and the charged acts; (2) the time lapse between the other acts and the charged acts; (3) the frequency of the prior acts; (4) the occurrence of intervening events; and (5) the need for evidence beyond the defendant's and alleged victim's testimony. State v. Boysaw, 52 Kan. App. 2d 635, 650-651, 372 P.3d 1261 (2016), review granted (Apr. 20, 2017). 398. When a defendant does not dispute the factual basis of the state's allegation but attempts to provide an innocent explanation for the presence of drugs, evidence of prior drug use by the defendant is relevant and probative to prove a disputed material fact. State v. Rosa, 304 Kan. 429, 435, 371 P.3d 915 (2016). 399. Alleged prior sexual misconduct evidence is inadmissible to establish absence of mistake unless the defendant has argued that defendant committed the charged crime by mistake. State v. Gonzalez-Sandoval, 53 Kan. App. 2d 536, 390 P.3d 84 (2017), rev. granted (Sept. 29, 2017). 400. A provision in K.S.A. 60-455 concerning the admissibility of additional acts or offenses of sexual misconduct to show propensity for sexual misconduct does not violate a defendant's right to due process under the 14th amendment to the U.S. Constitution. State v. Boysaw, 309 Kan. 526, 536, 439 P.3d 909 (2019). 401. Evidence of a defendant's prior bad acts was admissible to show the identity of a videographer when the identity was in dispute. State v. Hays, 57 Kan. App. 2d 895, 907, 462 P.3d 1195 (2020). 402. Photographs documenting a prior assault of a child were admissible as evidence of other crimes. State v. Lyman, 311 Kan. 1, 29, 455 P.3d 393 (2020). 403. When a district court permits evidence of prior crimes or bad acts, exculpatory evidence related to the same prior crime or bad act is relevant. State v. Broxton, 311 Kan. 357, 365, 461 P.3d 54 (2020). 404. A district court's failure to give a limiting instruction concerning prior convictions is not always reversible error. State v. Albano, 58 Kan. App. 2d 117, 123, 464 P.3d 332 (2020). 405. When a defendant challenges the court's admission of evidence of other crimes or civil wrongs because its probative value is outweighed by prejudice, the defendant must demonstrate the court abused its discretion. State v. Hachmeister, 311 Kan. 504, 511, 464 P.3d 947 (2020). 406. Evidence of defendant's prior distribution crime was admissible for purpose of proving whether intent was possession or distribution. State v. Brazzle, 311 Kan. 754, 765, 466 P.3d 1195 (2020). 407. If a district court properly admitted evidence under one enumerated exception listed in subsection (b), appellate courts need not address the applicability of another enumerated exception. State v. Meggerson, 312 Kan. 238, 474 P.3d 761 (2020). 408. Admission of evidence in violation of K.S.A. 60-455 is subject to nonconstitutional harmlessness standard. State v. Knapp, 313 Kan. 824, 490 P.3d 1228 (2021). 409. Prior acts evidence was prejudicial, but dispositive question is whether the evidence is unduly prejudicial or actually or probably brings about the wrong result under the circumstances of the case. State v. Evans, 313 Kan. 972, 492 P.3d 418 (2021). 410. Ambiguous statements that lack specificity do not concern a crime or civil wrong under this statute; statute does not prohibit the admission of evidence about other crimes and civil wrongs if the evidence relates to acts committed as part of the events surrounding the crimes or civil wrongs at issue in the trial. State v. Sieg, 315 Kan. 526, 533, 509 P.3d 535 (2022). 411. Whether there is a reasonable probability that the erroneous admission of prior drug crime evidence affected the outcome of the trial in light of the entire record meets the harmless error standard when the error implicates a statutory but not a federal constitutional right. State v. Campbell, 317 Kan. 511, 518, 532 P.3d 425 (2023). 412. Court lacked jurisdiction to review the district court's decision excluding the state's evidence of other crimes due to the timeliness of a filed appeal and dismissed the state's interlocutory appeal on that issue. State v. Harris, 64 Kan. App. 2d 432, 438, 551 P.3d 240 (2024). 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