Printable Format75-5201. Purpose and construction. The legislative purpose in enacting this act shall be deemed to be establishment of a policy of treatment of persons convicted of felonies in this state by placing maximum emphasis on rehabilitation of each such person while in the custody of the state or under the jurisdiction of the courts of the state, consistent with the interests and safety of the public, so that a maximum of persons so convicted may be returned to private life in the communities of the state with improved work habits, education, mental and physical health and attitudes necessary to become and remain useful and self-reliant citizens. It is the intent of the legislature that judges, the secretary of corrections, his or her agents, subordinates and employees and the Kansas adult authority, its agents, subordinates and employees will construe and apply this act and acts of which it is amendatory or supplemental liberally to rehabilitate, train, treat, educate and prepare persons convicted of felony in this state for entry or reentry into the social and economic system of the community upon leaving the custody of these state agencies and officers.
History: L. 1973, ch. 339, ยง 1; July 1, 1974.
Attorney General's Opinions:
Sheriff; transporting inmates to civil proceedings. 87-147.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Cited in holding state and county have duties to warn of major prison escape; not protected by K.S.A. 75-6104(c). Cansler v. State, 234 Kan. 554, 568, 675 P.2d 57 (1984).
2. Cited; denying good time credits for class A felony incarceration (K.S.A. 22-3717(b)) rationally related to valid legislative purpose. Olson v. Maschner, 10 Kan. App. 2d 289, 292, 697 P.2d 893 (1985).
3. Cited; jail time credit (K.S.A. 21-4614) while in community corrections facility on probation, authority to commit discussed. State v. Fowler, 238 Kan. 326, 334, 710 P.2d 1268 (1985).
4. Cited; authority of sentencing court and secretary of corrections concerning confinement (K.S.A. 21-4601, 21-4603) distinguished; procedures under K.S.A. 60-1501 et seq. examined. State ex rel. Stephan v. Clark, 243 Kan. 561, 566, 759 P.2d 119 (1988).
5. Service fee for administering inmates' trust accounts not violative of due process or ex post facto clauses. Roark v. Graves, 262 Kan. 194, 936 P.2d 245 (1997); Weinlood v. Simmons, 262 Kan. 259, 936 P.2d 238 (1997).
6. Conviction for dealing in rock cocaine may be proved by weight as well as dosage units. State v. Edwards, 27 Kan. App. 2d 754, 9 P.3d 568 (2000).