In State v. Dahmer, 2009 WL2242422 (Kan.App. July 24, 2009) the defendant failed to appear and the bond was forfeited. Before judgment was entered against the surety, however, the defendant was located and incarcerated in another state. Under amended K.S.A. §22-2807(3) that would be a defense The amendment became law on April 18, 2007, six days after the defendant failed to appear. The issue was whether the amended statute applied retroactively to bonds on which forfeiture had already been entered. The Court held that there was nothing in the amendment to indicate it should be given retroactive effect, and since it would impact a substantive right of the state, it would not be given retroactive effect in the absence of such an indication of legislative intent. Therefore, the judgment against the surety was affirmed.