Printable Format22-3801. Liability for costs. (a) If the defendant in a criminal case is convicted, the court costs shall be taxed against the defendant and shall be a judgment against the defendant which may be enforced as judgments for payment of money in civil cases.
(b) Jury fees are not court costs and shall be paid by the county in all criminal cases.
(c) The county shall not be reimbursed for the cost of employing a special prosecutor.
History: L. 1970, ch. 129, § 22-3801; L. 1978, ch. 128, § 1; L. 1982, ch. 116, § 4; L. 2007, ch. 51, § 1; July 1.
Source or Prior Law:
62-1901.
Cross References to Related Sections:
Jurors' fees, see 43-171.
Court fees in criminal actions, see 28-170a, 28-172a, 28-172b.
Attorney General's Opinions:
Costs in criminal cases; liability for costs. 79-37.
Costs in criminal cases; liability for costs; witness fees. 83-139.
Costs in criminal cases; liability for costs. 84-25.
Liability for costs in certain criminal cases. 85-149.
Sentencing; authorized dispositions; sentencing; probation; costs; home rule powers. 92-90.
Power of district court to contract with collection agency to collect unpaid court costs, fines, fees and restitution. 95-101.
Role of sheriff involved in taking custody of person wanted by another state; taking custody on property of federal prison; payment of costs; authority of requesting state. 96-6.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Cited in holding criminal docket fees should be commensurate with crime of conviction rather than crime charged. State v. Waufle, 9 Kan. App. 2d 68, 77, 673 P.2d 109 (1983).
2. Judgment for court costs is a civil judgment but court may excuse immediate payment by indigent defendant. State v. Higgins, 240 Kan. 756, 758, 760, 761, 732 P.2d 760. (1987).
3. Cited; assessment of extradition expenses as part of costs examined. State v. Dean, 12 Kan. App. 2d 321, 322, 743 P.2d 98 (1987).
4. Extradition costs as mandatory court costs taxable to defendant (K.S.A. 22-2724) determined. State v. Garrett, 14 Kan. App. 2d 8, 9, 780 P.2d 168 (1989).
5. The well-settled rule of law is that upon conviction a defendant shall be ordered to pay court costs. State v. DeHerrera, 251 Kan. 143, 155, 834 P.2d 918 (1992).
6. Assessment of lab fee is not a violation of ex post facto law prohibition because section is procedural in nature. State v. Likins, 21 Kan. App. 2d 420, 434, 903 P.2d 764 (1995).
7. Expert witness fee was properly charged as court costs. State v. Rother, 23 Kan. App. 2d 443, 931 P.2d 1268 (1997).
8. District court has discretion to assess only costs and expenses necessary to prove the crimes of conviction. State v. Lopez, 36 Kan. App. 2d 723, 727, 143 P.3d 695 (2006).
9. Convicted criminal defendant's court costs shall be taxed against defendant and judgment enforced as in civil cases. State v. Phillips, 289 Kan. 28, 210 P.3d 93 (2009).