|
Kentucky Court of Appeals (A service of the DPA Library) | |
|
(Locate by date or by case name) |
|
Use Adobe's Conversion Tool to convert the following PDF files into text in the event that you are viewing this page with assistive technology that is not compatible.
Tobar V Com., 2006-CA-001314
-- To Be Published ; Affirming
-- PDF
Conley V Com., 2006-CA-001590
-- Not To Be Published ; Affirming
-- PDF
Hellstrom V Com., 2006-CA-001828
-- Not To Be Published ; Affirming
-- PDF
Edmonds V Com., 2006-CA-002238
-- Not To Be Published ; Affirming
-- PDF
Terry Lee Tobar appeals from a judgment of conviction and final
sentence entered by the Fayette Circuit Court on May 31, 2006. Prior to the entry of this
judgment of conviction, Tobar entered a conditional guilty plea to one count of Failure to
Comply with Sex Offender Registration, Kentucky Revised Statute (KRS) 17.510(10).
On appeal, Tobar, who contends he is homeless, insists that KRS 17.510(10) is
unconstitutional because it is void for vagueness. Finding that the statute is not vague as
it applies to Tobar, we affirm.
David Wade Conley appeals from a judgment of the Fayette Circuit
Court upon a conditional guilty plea convicting him of cultivation of marijuana, a Class D
felony, and possession of drug paraphernalia, a Class A misdemeanor. Conley was
sentenced to one year in prison for the cultivation of marijuana conviction and a
concurrent one year sentence for the paraphernalia conviction with the total sentence being probated for three years. Conley appeals from the trial court's denial of his motion
to suppress evidence seized from his residence. For the reasons stated below, we affirm.
Appellant, Leif Eric Hellstrom, appeals pro se from an order of the
Jessamine Circuit Court denying his motion for relief pursuant to CR 60.02. Finding no
error, we affirm.
This appeal arises from a conditional guilty plea by Dierekus
Lamont Edmonds (Appellant) to charges of criminal attempt to tamper with physical
evidence and possession of marijuana. Appellant reserved the right to appeal the trial
court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence. Appellant seeks to suppress marijuana
found at the scene of his arrest. He asserts that the arrest was unlawful and, therefore, the
marijuana found at the scene should be suppressed as fruit of the poisonous tree. The
trial court found that the issue of the marijuana was a factual question that should be determined by a trial and not an issue for suppression. We agree with the trial court and
hold that the arrest of Appellant was lawful and the issue of whether or not the marijuana
belonged to Appellant is one for a trier of fact.
Hensley V Com., 2005-CA-002501
-- To Be Published ; Reversing and Remanding
-- PDF
Michael Hensley (hereinafter “Hensley”) entered a conditional
guilty plea pursuant to Kentucky Rules of Criminal Procedure (CR) 8.09 in the Knox
Circuit Court to the amended charge of attempting to manufacture methamphetamine1
and received a sentence of seven and one-half years. Within his guilty plea, Hensley reserved the right to appeal the circuit court's denial of his motion to suppress evidence.
It is from this denial that he appeals to this Court. For the following reasons, we reverse
and remand to the Knox Circuit Court.
Salyers V Com., 2006-CA-000538
-- Not To Be Published ; Affirming
-- PDF
Roark Jr. V Com., 2006-CA-001490
-- Not To Be Published ; Affirming
-- PDF
Maddix V Com., 2006-CA-001633.
-- Not To Be Published ; Affirming
-- PDF
Kirby V Com., 2006-CA-002227
-- Not To Be Published ; Affirming
-- PDF
Com.V Cole, 2006-CA-002249
-- To Be Published ; Reversing and Remanding
-- PDF
Charles Salyers was convicted, in Greenup Circuit Court, on one
count of rape in the first degree and was sentenced to ten years' incarceration. Now,
Salyers appeals the judgment of conviction and argues that the Greenup Circuit Court
erred regarding the admissibility of certain expert testimony and erred by failing to
instruct the jury on lesser included offenses. After reviewing the record and considering
the arguments of the parties, we affirm Salyers's judgment of conviction.
Franklin Roark, Jr. (Roark) appeals from the trial court's order
denying his RCr 11.42 motion to set aside his convictions for first-degree sexual abuse,
first-degree robbery, and second-degree burglary. In his RCr 11.42 motion, Roark argued
that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to call exculpatory witnesses Vicki
Barnett (Barnett) and Richard Marksberry to testify, for failing to obtain expert testimony
regarding DNA evidence, and for failing to obtain expert testimony regarding the reliability of evidence obtained after the victim underwent hypnosis. On this appeal,
Roark only raised the issue with regard to trial counsel's failure to call Barnett to testify.
Therefore, we will limit our review to that issue. For the reasons set forth below, we
affirm.
Gregory Casey Maddix, pro se, appeals the denial of his Kentucky
Rule of Civil Procedure (CR) 60.02 motion in which he sought credit, pursuant to
Kentucky Revised Statute (KRS) 532.120(3), for time spent in a Florida jail while
awaiting extradition to Kentucky and while incarcerated on a Florida charge. While
Maddix was in the Florida jail, he was on parole from the aforementioned conviction and sentence imposed by Boyd Circuit Court. After a careful review of the record, we affirm
the denial of his motion.
Patrick Kirby entered a conditional guilty plea, pursuant to
Kentucky Rules of Criminal Procedure (RCr) 8.09, to the charges of driving under the
influence first offense, possession of drug paraphernalia, possession of a controlled
substance first degree and failure to yield to a traffic control device. He was sentenced to
serve one year. He filed a motion to suppress the introduction in evidence of drugs and drug paraphernalia seized during a search of his car after a traffic stop. The court
conducted an evidentiary hearing on the motion and, after hearing testimony, determined
that the traffic stop that resulted in Kirby's arrest was allowed by the holding in Terry v.
Ohio, 392 U.S.1 (1968) because the police officer had a reasonable and articulable
suspicion of criminal activity. Kirby's conditional plea reserved the right to appeal the
trial court's decision, and this appeal followed. After a review of the record, we find no
error and affirm.
The Commonwealth of Kentucky appeals from an order of the
Boone Circuit Court dismissing a charge of probation violation and releasing defendant,
Christopher Cole, from the custody of the Boone County Jail. The order was based on
the court’s finding that a 2004 order of the Boone Circuit Court improperly extended
Cole’s probationary period. The Commonwealth argues that Cole expressly or impliedly
consented to an extension of the original five-year probationary period, and that the Boone Circuit Court erred in failing to so find. For the reasons stated below, we reverse
the order on appeal and remand it for further proceedings.
Silverbug V Com., 2006-ca-000640
-- Not To Be Published ; Affirming
-- PDF
Dailey v Com., 2006-CA-002050
-- Not To Be Published ; Affirming
-- PDF
Charles Joseph Dean appeals from a revocation of his probation
by the Jefferson Circuit Court. For the reasons stated herein, we affirm.
Ronald Lee Dailey, a prisoner detained in the Eastern Kentucky
Correctional Complex, appeals the denial of his motion to vacate his criminal conviction
under CR 60.02. For the reasons herein, we affirm Jefferson Circuit Court's denial of
relief.
DPA > Law Library > Slip Opinion Index > Browsable 2007