Opinion ID: 2575795
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Probable Cause to Believe Anderson Was a Conditional Release Violator

Text: On its petition for review, the State appears to have abandoned its earlier argument that Anderson's arrest was justified by probable cause to believe that he was a conditional release violator. We nevertheless address it briefly because it appears to have been somewhat influential in the district judge's decision. Probable cause to believe a person is a conditional release violator does not permit the person's warrantless arrest. K.S.A. 2005 Supp. 22-2401 states: A law enforcement officer may arrest a person under any of the following circumstances: (a) The officer has a warrant commanding that the person be arrested. (b) The officer has probable cause to believe that a warrant for the person's arrest has been issued in this state or in another jurisdiction for a felony committed therein. (c) The officer has probable cause to believe that the person is committing or has committed: (1) A felony; or (2) a misdemeanor, and the law enforcement officer has probable cause to believe that: (A) The person will not be apprehended or evidence of the crime will be irretrievably lost unless the person is immediately arrested; (B) the person may cause injury to self or others or damage to property unless immediately arrested; or (C) the person has intentionally inflicted bodily harm to another person. (d) Any crime, except a traffic infraction or a cigarette or tobacco infraction, has been or is being committed by the person in the officer's view. A violation of conditional release is not a crime of any type under the Kansas Criminal Code. See K.S.A. 21-3101 et seq.; State v. Sullivan, 17 Kan. App. 2d 771, 773, 844 P.2d 741 (1993). Even if the officers who arrested Anderson had probable cause to believe he was a conditional release violator, that alone could not justify his warrantless arrest.