SESSION OF 2025
CONFERENCE COMMITTEE REPORT BRIEF
SENATE BILL NO. 186
As Agreed to March 26, 2025
Brief*
SB 186 would amend criminal procedure laws related to the availability of probable cause
information, issuance of search warrants, setting bond for persons charged with certain sex
offenses, forfeiture of appearance bonds, and the regulation of compensated sureties. The bill
also would revise the Kansas Criminal Code definition of certain sex crimes to include conduct
related to artificially generated visual depictions and define related terms.
Probable Cause Information—Warrant or Summons
The bill would require affidavits or sworn testimony supporting probable cause in the
issuance of a warrant or summons to be made available to law enforcement agencies prior to
the execution of such warrant or summons.
Issuance of Search Warrants
The bill would specify only law enforcement officers may provide sworn statements
supporting a finding of probable cause to issue a search warrant. Under current law, any person
may provide such statements.
Bond Setting—Sex Crimes
The bill would make changes to criminal bond laws to require a magistrate determine prior
convictions of the underlying offense or comparable out-of-state convictions upon available
evidence when setting bond if the defendant has been charged with:
●Rape;
●Criminal sodomy or aggravated criminal sodomy;
●Aggravated sexual battery; or
●Indecent liberties with a child or aggravated indecent liberties with a child.
____________________
*Conference committee report briefs are prepared by the Legislative Research Department and do not express
legislative intent. No summary is prepared when the report is an agreement to disagree. Conference committee
report briefs may be accessed on the Internet at https://klrd.gov/
1 - 186 If the magistrate determines that such defendant has a prior conviction of a sexually violent
crime, as defined in continuing law, the bill would require a minimum bond amount of $750,000.
Additionally, the bill would require minimum conditions for the bond include: no contact with any
victims or witnesses, and require the magistrate to place the defendant under a house arrest
program.
The bill would further specify that bond could not be reduced or modified downward unless
the magistrate determines by a preponderance of the evidence at an evidentiary hearing and
makes a written finding on the record that the defendant is not a public safety risk or a flight risk.
At the evidentiary hearing, there would be a presumption that the defendant is both a public
safety risk and a flight risk.
Forfeiture of Appearance Bonds
The bill would require warrants issued for failure to appear to be provided to a
compensated surety, change the criteria for setting aside bond forfeitures, and require the return
of a percentage of an appearance bond in certain circumstances.
Warrants Provided to Surety Upon Forfeiture
Under continuing law, whenever a defendant is charged with a felony offense and fails to
appear as directed by the court, the sheriff must enter the warrant into the National Crime
Information Center index within 14 days of issuance of the warrant. The bill would require, upon
request, the court to make a copy of the warrant available to the compensated surety who
deposited the bond on behalf of the defendant.
When Bond Forfeiture May Be Set Aside
The bill would require a court to set aside (not enforce) a forfeiture in certain
circumstances, in addition to other ways the court may or must direct forfeitures to be set aside
in continuing law.
The bill would require the court to set aside a bond forfeiture when the warrant has not
been provided to the compensated surety as directed by the bill unless there is good cause
shown.
The bill would also require the court to set aside a bond forfeiture when the defendant was
not held subject to an immigration detainer when the bond was posted and the surety can prove
that the defendant has been deported from the United States prior to judgment of default. The
bill would require the surety provide to the court a written statement, signed by the surety under
penalty of perjury, setting forth facts substantiating the deportation.
2 - 186 Remission of Appearance Bond
The bill would require, when a forfeiture has not been set aside and a judgment of default
has been issued, the court to remit (return) a portion of the amount of the appearance bond to
the obligor if the defendant is returned to custody within a certain number of days after judgment
is entered, as follows:
●90 percent if returned within 90 days;
●75 percent if returned within 91 to 180 days; or
●50 percent if returned within 181 to 270 days.
Regulation of Compensated Sureties
The bill would prohibit a compensated surety from making loans for the purpose of
financing the minimum appearance bond premium required to be paid before posting a bond.
Under continuing law, a compensated surety must charge a minimum appearance bond
premium of 10 percent of the face amount of the bond, and post a bond only after the
compensated surety has received at least 5 percent of such premium. The bill would specify
that a compensated surety could not provide a loan, nor be affiliated with any financial institution
providing such loan, for this 5 percent minimum.
[Note: The Kansas Code of Criminal Procedure defines “compensated surety” as any
person or entity that issues appearance bonds for compensation, posts bail for four or more
persons in a calendar year, is responsible for any forfeiture, and is liable for appearance bonds
written by such person’s or entity’s authorized agents. A compensated surety is an insurance
agent surety, a property surety, or a bail agent.]
Sexual Exploitation of a Child
The bill would expand the conduct that constitutes the crime of sexual exploitation of a
child to include possessing any artificially generated visual depiction with intent to arouse or
satisfy the sexual desires or appeal to the prurient interest of the offender or any other person.
The bill would define “artificially generated visual depiction” as an obscene visual depiction
produced through the use of computer software, digital manipulation, or other means that
creates an image or video depicting a child under 18 years of age shown or heard engaging in
sexually explicit conduct.
The definition would include depictions that are obscene and indistinguishable from a real
child, morphed from a real child’s image, or generated without any actual child involvement.
The bill would define “obscene” as a visual depiction or artificially generated visual
depiction that, taken as a whole, appeals to the prurient interest of an average person, applying
contemporary community standards, that is patently offensive, and that, taken as a whole, lacks
literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
3 - 186 Unlawful Transmission of a Visual Depiction of a Child
The bill would also expand the definition of “visual depiction” as used in the crime of
unlawful transmission of a visual depiction of an identifiable child. Visual depictions under this
crime would include, but would not be limited to, such items created, in whole or in part, altered,
or modified by artificial intelligence or any digital means to appear to depict or purport to depict
an identifiable child, regardless of whether such identifiable child was involved in the creation of
the original image.
Breach of Privacy
The bill would also expand the crime of breach of privacy to include disseminating any
videotape, photograph, film, or image that was created, altered, or modified by artificial
intelligence to appear to depict or purport to depict an identifiable person regardless of whether
such person was involved in the creation of the original image.
The bill would specify that the crime of breach of privacy would not apply to a cable
service, a provider of direct-to-home satellite services, or a multi-channel video programming
distributor or affiliate as defined by federal law.
Conference Committee Action
The Conference Committee agreed to the contents of SB 186, as amended by the House
Committee on Judiciary, concerning probable cause information and bond setting for sex
crimes, but excluding the provisions of HB 2401 regarding criminal history scoring for an
unconstitutional crime, and to add the contents of:
●SB 157, as amended by the House Committee on Judiciary, regarding the issuance of
search warrants, forfeiture of appearance bonds, and regulation of compensated
sureties; and
●HB 2183, as amended by the Senate Committee on Judiciary, regarding artificially
generated visual depictions of a child.
Background
The Conference Committee added the provisions of SB 157, as amended by the House
Committee on Judiciary, and HB 2183, as amended by the Senate Committee on Judiciary, to
the contents of SB 186, as amended by the House Committee on Judiciary, while making a
further amendment to SB 186 to remove provisions related to criminal history scoring. The
background for each bill is provided below.
SB 186 (Probable Cause Information and Setting Bond for Sex Crimes)
The House Committee on Judiciary amended SB 186 to insert the provisions of HB 2389,
as amended by the House Committee on Judiciary, and HB 2401, as introduced, while retaining
the contents of SB 186.
4 - 186 SB 186 (Probable Cause Information)
SB 186 was introduced by the Senate Committee on Judiciary at the request of a
representative of the Kansas Sheriffs Association, Kansas Association of Chiefs of Police, and
Kansas Peace Officers Association.
Senate Committee on Judiciary. In the Senate Committee hearing, a representative of
the Kansas Sheriffs Association and Kansas Association of Chiefs of Police provided
proponent testimony. The proponent stated the proposed language of SB 186 is needed for law
enforcement to receive warrant information in the State’s court records management system.
Written-only neutral testimony was provided by a representative of the Board of Indigents’
Defense Services (BIDS).
No other testimony was provided.
The Senate Committee recommended the bill be placed on the Consent Calendar.
House Committee on Judiciary. In the House Committee hearing, proponent testimony
was provided by a representative of the Kansas Sheriffs Association, Kansas Association of
Chiefs of Police, and Kansas Peace Officers Association that was substantially similar to
testimony provided in the Senate Committee.
Written-only neutral testimony was provided by a representative of BIDS.
No other testimony was provided.
HB 2389 (Bond Setting—Sex Crimes)
HB 2389 was introduced by the House Committee on Federal and State Affairs at the
request of Representative Essex on behalf of Representative L. Williams.
House Committee on Judiciary. In the House Committee hearing, proponent testimony
was provided by Representative L. Williams and the Johnson County District Attorney. The
conferees stated the bill would provide additional safety for victims of sex crimes and could
result in additional safety to the community due to additional bond considerations.
Written-only proponent testimony was provided by Senator Pettey; a representative of the
Kansas Association of Chiefs of Police, Kansas Peace Officers Association, and Kansas Sheriffs
Association; a representatives of the City of Overland Park; a representative of the Samuel
Rodgers Health Center; three former state legislators; and 44 private citizens.
No other testimony was provided.
The House Committee amended the bill to:
●Remove the crime of sexual battery from the list of prior convictions to be determined;
●Require a court to determine, rather than consider, prior convictions upon available
evidence; and
5 - 186 ●Add language to specify a minimum bond amount of $750,000, set minimum
conditions, and establish findings required for a reduced or modified bond for sexually
violent crimes.
[Note: The Conference Committee retained these amendments.]
HB 2401 (Criminal History Scoring—Unconstitutional Crimes)
HB 2401 was introduced by the House Committee on Federal and State Affairs at the
request of Representative Humphries.
House Committee on Judiciary. In the House Committee hearing, proponent testimony
was provided by the Sedgwick County District Attorney on behalf of the Kansas County and
District Attorneys Association (KCDAA). The conferee stated the bill would address case law
that interpreted current law to require convictions to be counted toward criminal history, even if
the crime was later found to be unconstitutional. The conferee stated his belief that this decision
was contrary to the legislative intent behind the statute.
Opponent testimony was provided by a representative of BIDS. The conferee stated the
bill would seek to undo a court decision and would result in further uncertainty in sentencing and
result in unnecessary appeals.
No other testimony was provided.
[Note: The Conference Committee did not retain these amendments.]
SB 157 (Warrants, Bond, and Sureties)
The House Committee on Judiciary inserted the contents of SB 138 and SB 244 into SB
157 while retaining the contents of SB 157.
SB 157 (Forfeiture of Appearance Bonds)
The bill was introduced by the Senate Committee on Judiciary at the request of Senator
Owens.
Senate Committee on Judiciary. In the Senate Committee hearing, Senator Owens and
a representative of the Kansas Bail Agents Association (KBAA) provided proponent testimony.
The proponents generally agreed that the bill would ensure consistency in the enforcement of
bond forfeitures.
Opponent testimony was provided by a representative of the Kansas Sheriffs Association,
who expressed concerns regarding a sheriff’s duty to provide copies to sureties and the
protection of bail agents who may know that a defendant is a flight risk but elect to bond them
anyway.
The Senate Committee amended the bill to:
6 - 186 ●Modify who must provide a copy of the warrant to the compensated surety; and
●Modify the conditions under which a court may direct a bond be forfeited.
[Note: The Conference Committee retained these amendments.]
House Committee on Judiciary. In the House Committee hearing, Senator Owens and
the representative of the KBAA provided proponent testimony that was similar to the testimony
provided in the Senate Committee hearing and suggested amendments to further clarify when
bond forfeitures must be set aside and to provide a tiered remission scheme.
Written-only proponent testimony was provided by a representative of the Kansas Sheriffs
Association.
Neutral testimony was provided by a representative of the KCDAA, who stated support for
the amendments made by the Senate Committee and the additional amendments proposed by
proponents.
No other testimony was provided.
The House Committee amended the bill to:
●Clarify that a surety must make a request of the court to make a copy of the warrant
available;
●Further clarify when a forfeiture involving a deported defendant must be set aside;
●Provide for a tiered remission of forfeited bond amounts depending on the number of
days within which a defendant is returned to custody after forfeiture;
●Add the contents of SB 138, concerning the issuance of search warrants; and
●Add the contents of SB 244, concerning the regulation of compensated sureties.
[Note: The Conference Committee retained these amendments.]
SB 138 (Issuance of Search Warrants)
SB 138 was introduced by the Senate Committee on Judiciary at the request of a
representative of the KCDAA.
Senate Committee on Judiciary. In the Senate Committee hearing, two representatives
of KCDAA provided proponent testimony. The proponents stated that because search warrants
have been requested by persons outside of law enforcement in at least two counties in the past
year, making this clarifying change is necessary to protect the reasonable expectation of privacy
of Kansas citizens who may be subject to search warrants issued only to harass or embarrass
them.
No other testimony was provided.
7 - 186 House Committee on Judiciary. In the House Committee hearing, two representatives of
KCDAA provided proponent testimony that was substantially similar to testimony provided in
the Senate Committee hearing.
No other testimony was provided.
SB 244 (Regulation of Compensated Sureties)
SB 244 was introduced by the Senate Committee on Judiciary at the request of Senator
Owens.
Senate Committee on Judiciary. In the Senate Committee hearing, proponent testimony
was provided by Senator Owens and a representative of the KBAA. The proponents stated the
purpose of this bill is to ensure bonding companies comply with the intent of legislation requiring
minimum payments on bond premiums enacted in 2024.
Written-only proponent testimony was provided by a representative of the Kansas Sheriffs
Association.
No other testimony was provided.
Senate Committee of the Whole. The Senate Committee of the Whole amended the bill
to remove a requirement that any loan obtained for payment of a bond premium be obtained
from a financial institution. [Note: The Conference Committee retained this amendment.]
House Committee on Judiciary. In the House Committee hearing, Senator Owens and a
representative of KBAA provided proponent testimony that was substantially similar to
testimony provided in the Senate Committee hearing.
Written-only proponent testimony was provided by representatives of the KCDAA and the
Kansas Sheriffs Association.
No other testimony was provided.
HB 2183 (Including AI in Certain Sex Crimes)
HB 2183 was introduced by the House Committee on Judiciary at the request of
Representative Barrett.
House Committee on Judiciary
In the House Committee hearing, proponent testimony was provided by Representative
Barrett, the Shawnee County District Attorney, and a representative of the Kansas Association
of Chiefs of Police, Kansas Peace Officers Association, and the Kansas Sheriffs Association.
The proponents generally stated the bill would provide an additional tool to identify child sexual
abuse offenders and prevent further harm to children.
8 - 186 Written-only proponent testimony was provided by a representative of the Wichita Police
Department.
Opponent testimony was provided by a representative of BIDS. The opponent generally
stated the bill would violate the freedom of speech protected by the First Amendment of the
U.S. Constitution.
No other testimony was provided.
The House Committee amended the bill to:
●Modify the elements of the crime of sexual exploitation of a child;
●Add definitions of “artificially-generated visual depiction” and “obscene” in the crime of
sexual exploitation of a child;
●Modify the definition of “visual depiction” in the crime of unlawful transmission of a
visual depiction of a child;
●Modify the elements of the crime of breach of privacy; and
●Exempt cable service as defined by federal law from the crime of breach of privacy.
[Note: The Conference Committee retained these amendments.]
House Committee of the Whole
The House Committee of the Whole amended the provisions of the bill related to unlawful
transmission of a visual depiction of a child to clarify the definition of “visual depiction” under the
bill to include visual depictions of an identifiable child when knowingly transmitting such
depictions. [Note: The Conference Committee retained this amendment.]
Senate Committee on Judiciary
In the Senate Committee hearing, Representative Barrett, the Shawnee County District
Attorney, and the representative of the Kansas Association of Chiefs of Police, Kansas Peace
Officers Association, and Kansas Sheriffs Association provided proponent testimony that was
substantially similar to the testimony provided in the House Committee hearing.
The representative of BIDS provided opponent testimony that was substantially similar to
the testimony provided in the House Committee hearing.
No other testimony was provided.
The Senate Committee amended the bill to exempt direct-to-home satellite services and
multi-video programming distributors and affiliates from the crime of breach of privacy. [Note:
The Conference Committee retained this amendment.]
9 - 186 Fiscal Information
SB 186 (Probable Cause Information)
According to the fiscal note prepared by the Division of the Budget on SB 186, as
introduced, the Office of Judicial Administration indicates enactment of the bill could increase
expenditures for the Judicial Branch, but a precise fiscal effect cannot be estimated. Any fiscal
effect associated with enactment of SB 186 is not reflected in The FY 2026 Governor’s Budget
Report.
HB 2389 (Bond Setting—Sex Crimes)
According to the fiscal note prepared by the Division of the Budget on HB 2389, as
introduced, the Office of Judicial Administration indicates enactment of the bill could increase
expenditures for the Judicial Branch because the bill would require the court to consider certain
factors when bond is being set for certain sex offenses. This would increase the time spent by
district court judicial and non-judicial personnel in processing, researching, and hearing cases.
However, a fiscal effect cannot be estimated. Any fiscal effect associated with HB 2389 is not
reflected in The FY 2026 Governor’s Budget Report.
SB 157 (Kansas Code of Criminal Procedure)
SB 157 (Forfeiture of Appearance Bonds)
According to the fiscal note prepared by the Division of the Budget on SB 157, as
introduced, the Office of Judicial Administration indicates enactment of the bill would have a
minimal fiscal effect on the Judicial Branch that could be absorbed within existing resources.
Any fiscal effect associated with enactment of the bill is not reflected in The FY 2026 Governor’s
Budget Report.
SB 138 (Issuance of Search Warrants)
According to the fiscal note prepared by the Division of the Budget on SB 138, as
introduced, the Judicial Branch indicates enactment of the bill would have no fiscal effect on its
operations.
The Kansas Association of Counties and the League of Kansas Municipalities indicate that
enactment of the bill would have no fiscal effect on local governments.
SB 244 (Regulation of Compensated Sureties)
According to the fiscal note prepared by the Division of the Budget on SB 244, as
introduced, the Office of Judicial Administration indicates enactment of the bill would have a
minimal fiscal effect that could be absorbed within existing resources.
10 - 186 The Insurance Department indicates enactment of the bill would not have a fiscal effect on
the agency.
Any fiscal effect associated with enactment of the bill is not reflected in The FY 2026
Governor’s Budget Report.
HB 2183 (Including AI in Certain Sex Crimes)
According to the fiscal note prepared by the Division of the Budget on HB 2183, as
introduced, BIDS indicates enactment of the bill would increase agency expenditures on legal
counsel and support staff by unknown amounts. BIDS estimates that on average, a severity
level 8-10 person felony case requires 35 hours of direct work by an attorney to provide
constitutionally adequate representation. Based on the rates of $83.36 per hour for public
defenders and $125 per hour for assigned counsel, each new severity level 8-10 person felony
case brought to the agency would result in State General Fund (SGF) expenditures of $2,918 to
$4,375.
Further, BIDS indicates that on average, a severity level 4-7 person felony case requires
57 hours of work by an attorney. Therefore, each new severity level 4-7 person felony case
brought to the agency would result in SGF expenditures of $4,752 to $7,152. The agency does
not expect the misdemeanor provisions of the bill to have a fiscal effect on its operations, as it
does not handle such cases. BIDS indicates that it may require 1.0 new FTE attorney position
and possibly additional support staff depending on the number of new cases brought under the
bill.
The Judicial Branch indicates that enactment of the bill has the potential to increase the
number of cases filed in district courts. This may increase agency operating expenditures due to
the additional time spent by district court judicial and nonjudicial personnel in processing,
researching, and hearing cases. However the Judicial Branch is unable to calculate an exact
estimate of this effect. Enactment of the bill has the potential to increase the collection of docket
fees, fines, and supervision fees, which are deposited in the SGF; however, the amount of
additional collections is unknown.
The Sentencing Commission indicates that enactment of the bill has the potential to
increase prison admissions and the number of prison beds needed; however, an exact estimate
of this effect cannot be determined.
The Department of Corrections indicates that enactment of the bill has the potential to
increase agency operating expenditures depending on its effect on prison admissions and beds.
Any fiscal effect associated with the bill is not reflected in The FY 2026 Governor’s Budget
Report.
The Kansas Association of Counties indicates that enactment of the bill has the potential to
increase county government expenditures on legal proceedings. The League of Kansas
Municipalities indicates that enactment of the bill would have negligible fiscal effect on cities.
11 - 186 Criminal procedure; criminal history; warrants; bond; law enforcement; sex crimes; artificial intelligence; child pornography; breach
of privacy; sexual exploitation of a child; unlawful transmission; visual depiction; appearance bonds; courts; sureties; failure to
appear; criminal procedure; bond premiums
ccrb_sb186_00_0000.odt
12 - 186