Printable Format60-472. Photographs of property wrongfully taken. In any prosecution for a crime involving the wrongful taking of property, photographs of the property alleged to have been wrongfully taken may be deemed competent evidence of such property and may be admissible in the prosecution to the same extent as if such property had been introduced as evidence. Such photographs may be admitted into evidence if they meet the foundation requirements under the rules of evidence.
History: L. 1979, ch. 182, § 1; L. 1980, ch. 173, § 1; L. 2005, ch. 172, § 1; July 1.
Law Review and Bar Journal References:
"Survey of Kansas Law: Evidence," Mark M. Dobson, 32 K.L.R. 625, 656, 657 (1984).
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Photographs admissible upon proper foundation and identification if they accurately represent matters relevant to issues in case. State v. Shoemake, 228 Kan. 572, 573, 618 P.2d 1201.
2. Procedure for prompt restoration of property to rightful owner criminally taken from owner. State v. Antwine & McHenry, 6 Kan. App. 2d 900, 903, 636 P.2d 208 (1981).
3. Failure of strict compliance with statute or error in admitting into evidence photographs of alleged stolen items harmless when items themselves admitted into evidence. State v. Heck, 8 Kan. App. 2d 496, 499, 502, 503, 661 P.2d 798 (1983).
4. Cited; sanctions for return of stolen property to crime victim, protection of rights of defendant and state discussed. State v. Winter, 238 Kan. 530, 533, 712 P.2d 1228 (1986).
5. State did not present adequate foundation for introduction of photographs showing items stolen from stockroom of store. State v. Mayes, 33 Kan. App. 2d 9, 98 P.3d 294 (2004).