Printable Format13-616.
History: L. 1903, ch. 122, § 111; R.S. 1923, § 13-616; Repealed, L. 1973, ch. 61, § 12-4702; April 1, 1974.
Source or prior law:
G.S. 1868, ch. 18, § 70; L. 1874, ch. 46, § 56; L. 1881, ch. 37, § 65; L. 1885, ch. 98, § 7.
Cross References to Related Sections:
Later act, see 12-4502.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Requirements of recognizance on appeal from police court considered. City of Kansas City v. Hescher, 4 Kan. App. 782, 789, 46 P. 1005.
2. Superadded conditions to recognizance not cause for dismissal of appeal. City of Kansas City v. Hescher, 4 Kan. App. 782, 789, 46 P. 1005.
3. Defendant is allowed ten days in which to perfect appeal. City of Kansas City v. Fagan, 4 Kan. App. 796, 800, 46 P. 1009.
4. Recognizance need not be executed or acknowledged before police judge. City of Kansas City v. Fagan, 4 Kan. App. 796, 798, 46 P. 1009.
5. Recognizance cannot require payment of fine and costs. City of Kansas City v. Fagan, 4 Kan. App. 796, 799, 46 P. 1009.
6. City cannot appeal directly from police judge to supreme court. City of Leavenworth v. Weaver, 26 Kan. 392, 393, 394.
7. Trial on oral complaint; requirements of record on appeal considered. Topeka v. Kersch, 70 Kan. 840, 843, 79 P. 681, 80 P. 29.
8. Certified copy of docket entries and certificate of recognizance, record. Topeka v. Kersch, 70 Kan. 840, 843, 79 P. 681, 80 P. 29.
9. Names of witnesses need not be endorsed on complaint. City of Topeka v. Briggs, 90 Kan. 843, 844, 135 P. 1184.
10. Proceedings on appeal; endorsement of names of witnesses unnecessary. City of Topeka v. Briggs, 90 Kan. 843, 844, 135 P. 1184.
11. Cited; jury trial not demandable on appeal from police court conviction. City of Fort Scott v. Arbuckle, 165 Kan. 374, 387, 196 P.2d 217.