Information that a prisoner is compelled to disclose as a condition of participation in a sexual abuse treatment program can be used against him in future civil cases, such as a commitment for a sexually violent predator.

Michael A. Bankes was convicted of indecent liberties with a child. In prison, authorities invited Bankes to participate in a Sexual Abuse Treatment Program (SATP), provided that he admit guilt. Fearing adverse consequences, Bankes declined enrollment.

Pursuant to regulatory provisions as amended after Bankes' sentencing, the prisoner's refusal to participate resulted not only in a loss of personal TV and canteen privileges, but in a withholding of good time credits, extending his parole eligibility and conditional release dates.

Bankes filed a habeas corpus action, arguing that the admission of guilt requirement violated, his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination, and that the imposed forfeiture of good time credits constituted an ex post facto law. When the county district court dismissed his petition for failure to state a claim, Bankes appealed to the court of appeals, which transferred the matter to the Kansas Supreme Court.

Citing Allen v. Illinois, 478 U.S. 364 (1976), the Court determined that the Fifth Amendment precluded the use of Bankes' compelled information only in subsequent criminal proceedings. Moreover, the loss of prison privileges and withholding of good time credits did not pose the, significant hardship necessary to rise to the level of a Fifth Amendment violation. Nevertheless, the Court reversed the trial court's dismissal of Bankes' petition on ex post facto grounds.

In partially concurring opinions, the Chief Justice dissented from the ex post facto law ruling, and two justices dissented from the Fifth Amendment holding.