2004 Unpublished Court of Appeals Opinions Index

Table of Cases
H

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.


Hagan V Com, /2003-CA-001701- Not To Be Published; Reversing -- PDF

Appellant Lisa D. Hagan was convicted pursuant to a conditional guilty plea of possession of a controlled substance, methamphetamine, possession of drug paraphernalia, second offense, and two counts of endangering the welfare of a minor. Her plea was conditioned on a right to appeal the denial of her motion to suppress evidence. She attacked the validity of the search warrant which was issued to search her residence. The circuit court declined to suppress the evidence after finding the search warrant was supported by probable cause. The court also found no bad faith on the part of the arresting officer.

Hankins v. Com, 2003-CA-000116-MR -- Not Published; Vacating and Remanding -- PDF

Jeffrey Hankins has appealed from a final judgment and sentence of the Todd Circuit Court entered on August 29, 2002, which, following Hankins’s conditional pleas of guilty to possession of marijuana under eight ounces,1 possession of drug paraphernalia, second offense,2 operating a motor vehicle on a suspended license,3 and operating a motor vehicle without insurance,4 sentenced Hankins to three years’ imprisonment in accordance with the Commonwealth’s recommendations.

Hardy V Com, 2003-CA-000584 --To Be Published; Affirming -- PDF

Edward Lamont Hardy has appealed from a final judgment and sentence of the Fayette Circuit Court entered on February 24, 2003, which, following Hardy’s conditional plea of guilty to trafficking in a controlled substance in the first degree,1 sentenced him to five years’ imprisonment in accordance with the Commonwealth’s recommendation. Having concluded that the trial court did not err by denying Hardy’s motion to suppress evidence, we affirm.

Harris v. Com., 2002-CA-002310- Not To Be Published; Affirming -- PDF

The sole question in this appeal is whether the trial court erred in denying appellant’s motion for RCr2 11.42 relief without appointing counsel or conducting an evidentiary hearing. Because we are convinced that allegations advanced in appellant’s post-conviction motion are conclusively refuted by the record, we affirm the denial of relief in this case.

Hartl v Com, 2002-CA-00232-MR--Not To Be Published; Affirming -- PDF

Joey Hart (Hart) appeals pro se from an order of the McCracken Circuit Court denying his motion to vacate his sentence pursuant to the Kentucky Rules of Criminal Procedure (RCr) 11.42. We affirm..

Hatfield v Com, 2003-CA-001509 -- Not Published; Vacating and Remanding -- PDF

Teko Hatfield appeals an order of the Jefferson Circuit Court which summarily denied his motion to vacate his sentence pursuant to RCr1 11.42. He claims that his allegations of ineffective assistance of trial counsel cannot be resolved on the face of the record. After our review of the record, we agree. Therefore, we vacate and remand this matter for an evidentiary hearing. Fraser v. Commonwealth, Ky., 59 S.W.3d 448, 452 (2001).

Hatcher v. Com., 2002-CA-002480-- Published; Reversing and Remanding -- PDF

Dedra Hatcher appeals following a conditional plea of guilty to the charge of possession of drug paraphernalia, entered pursuant to Kentucky Rules of Criminal Procedure (RCr) 8.09, prompted by the circuit court’s denial of her motion to suppress a pipe found during a warrantless search of her home.

Hatton v. Com, 2002-CA-002630-MR-- Not Published; Affirming -- PDF

Robbie L. Clark has appealed from a final judgment of the Marshall Circuit Court entered on December 18, 2002, which sentenced him to five-years’ imprisonment. Clark had entered conditional guilty pleas to charges of failing to register as a sex offender and of being a persistent felony offender in the second degree (PFO II).

Hatton v. Com, 2002-CA-001259 -- Not Published; Affirming -- PDF

Shawn Hatton appeals from the judgment of the Montgomery Circuit Court convicting him of second-degree arson and sentencing him to twelve years’ imprisonment. The sole issue before this Court is whether Hatton was entitled to a lesser-included instruction or alternative instructions on the wanton criminal mischief charge.

Hawkins V Com, 2003-CA-002759--Not To Be Published; Reversing and Remanding -- PDF

In June 2001, Brian Hawkins received a five year probated sentence from the Warren Circuit Court. This probated sentence was revoked in August 2002 because of a felony conviction in Hart County, and it was ordered to run consecutively with the Hart County sentence. We must decide whether the Warren Circuit Court later possessed jurisdiction to amend its August 2002 judgment to delete the requirement that the sentences be served consecutively. As we hold that it did not, we reverse and remand the order of the Warren Circuit Court.

Hayden v. Com., 2002-CA-001710-- Not Published; Affirming -- PDF

On September 11, 1997, Hayden was indicted on charges of first-degree rape, two counts of first-degree sodomy, kidnapping, fourth-degree assault, and violation of a protective order. The alleged victim was his estranged wife.

Heard v Com, 2002-CA-002494-- Not To Be Published; Affirming-- PDF

Marquis Heard appeals from the final judgment of the Fayette Circuit Court which convicted him of first-degree criminal trespass and second-degree assault. Heard argues that the trial court made several errors during his trial: the admission of hearsay testimony, the failure to give an instruction on extreme emotional distress, and the denial of his motion for a mistrial.

Helton V Com,2003-CA-001309--Not To Be Published; Affirming -- PDF

This is an appeal from an order denying appellant’s RCr 11.42 motion alleging ineffective assistance of counsel in failing to investigate and interview certain witnesses regarding the testimony of one of the Commonwealth’s witnesses, a jailhouse snitch. From our review of the record,appellant’s trial counsel adequately investigated the potential impeachment of the witness and did, in fact, attempt to so impeach the witness at trial. Hence, there was no ineffective assistance of counsel.

Henderson v. Com.,2002-CA-001101 -- Not Published; Affirming -- PDF

Joyce Henderson has appealed from a judgment of conviction and sentence entered by the McCracken Circuit Court on May 2, 2002, convicting her of theft by deception over $300.001 for failing to report income increases to the Paducah Housing Authority. Having concluded that the circuit court did not err by refusing to accept her guilty plea to a lesser offense and by denying her motion for a directed verdict of acquittal, we affirm.

Henderson v. Com., 2002-CA-002099 -- Not Published; Affirming -- PDF

Aldean Henderson, Jr. (hereinafter “Henderson”) appeals pro se from the order of the Jefferson Circuit Court denying his CR 60.02(f) motion. We affirm.

Com. v. Henderson, 2002-CA-000460-- Not Published; Dismissing -- PDF

This is an appeal from an order entered by the Jefferson Circuit Court dismissing the underlying action with prejudice. For the reasons stated hereafter, we dismiss this appeal.

Hensley V Com, 2003-CA-001381--Not To Be Published; Affirming -- PDF

Appellant, Tommy Jeff Hensley (Hensley), was indicted on the charges of possession of a controlled substance in the first degree and persistent felony offender in the first degree. Defense counsel requested suppression of the evidence claiming that the stop of Hensley’s vehicle was in violation of law. The trial court denied the motion to suppress. We affirm the ruling of the Campbell Circuit Court.

Henson v Com, 2002-CA-002570 -- Not To Be Published; Affirming -- PDF

Christopher Henson (Henson) appeals the revocation of probation on a contempt conviction.2 Finding no abuse of discretion, we affirm.

Henson v Com, 2003-CA-001613 -- Not To Be Published; Affirming -- PDF

Christopher Henson appeals the denial of relief from the imposition of a guardian ad litem fee imposed as a condition of criminal abuse under KRS 510.140. We believe the question at this point is not the validity of the condition but whether the appellant is indigent at the time conditional discharge is revoked. Since the circuit judge did not revoke his conditional discharge, we affirm.

Herndon v Com, 2000-CA-002734- Not To Be Published; Reversing and Remanding With Direction -- PDF

A male teacher at a day care was targeted as a child abuser by an inexperienced and unqualified detective. Without any physical evidence, eyewitnesses, or corroborative evidence, the detective went so far as to manufacture evidence to ensure a conviction. The teacher was convicted of one count of first-degree sexual abuse2 (a class D felony) and four counts of (non-sexual) third-degree criminal abuse3 (class A misdemeanors). The felony conviction was built on a foundation of incompetent, unreliable, and even manufactured evidence, and, thus, cannot stand. The record includes a videotape of all four misdemeanor incidents, which exonerates the appellant.

Hill v Com, 2003-CA-000496-MR--Not To Be Published; Vacating and Remanding -- PDF

Robert Hill appeals from an order of the Henderson Circuit Court revoking his probated sentence and remanding him to custody to serve the remainder of a twelvemonth sentence on charges of criminal coercion and operating a motor vehicle while his license was suspended for driving under the influence. At issue is Hill’s contention that the trial court erred in revoking his probation. Murphy v. Commonwealth, Ky. App., 551 S.W.2d 838 (1977), outlines the due process rights afforded to a person on probation.

Hillyard V Com, 2003-CA-000610-MR-- Not To Be Published; 2003-CA-000855-MR Affirming -- PDF

Donnie Hillyard appeals from an order of the Union Circuit Court, entered on April 24, 2002, denying his CR 60.02 motion. We affirm. Hillyard was indicted in 1978 at the age of seventeen for murder, kidnapping, and first-degree rape.

Hines V Com, 2003-CA-001307-MR--Not To Be Published; 2003-CA-000855-MR Affirming -MR -- PDF

Reginald Hines appeals from a judgment of the Ballard Circuit Court wherein he entered a conditional guilty plea to the charges of first-degree trafficking in a controlled substance (cocaine) and trafficking in marijuana, first offense, and was sentenced to five years in prison. The sole issue before this court relates to the trial court’s denial of Hines’s motion to suppress evidence. We affirm.

Hines v Com, 2003-CA-001456 -- Not To Be Published; Affirming -- PDF

On January 28, 2001, a scuffle between two neighboring business owners escalated into a knife fight. Robbin Linn Hines was charged with stabbing Jim Leach multiple times. Hines was tried and convicted of assault in the first degree and carrying a concealed deadly weapon. He was sentenced to a total of ten years’ imprisonment. Hines appeals making three arguments. We affirm.

Holbrook v. Com., 2001-CA-000240 Not To Be Published; Affirming -- PDF

A Perry County Circuit jury found Appellant, Dickie Holbrook (Holbrook), guilty of flagrant nonsupport and fixed his punishment at a prison sentence of 3 ½ years. At final sentencing, the trial court imposed judgment in accordance with the jury’s verdict. This is a matter-of-right appeal in which Holbrook raises a number of issues for our review. Finding no error, we affirm.

Holbrook v. Com, 2003-CA-000383-MR--Not To Be Published; Reversing -- PDF

In December 1988, David Crate Holbrook was indicted for murder as a result of the death of Lee Watson. He was also charged as a persistent felony offender. His first trial resulted in a conviction for murder and he was sentenced to forty-five years’ imprisonment. The Kentucky Supreme Court reversed, and remanded the case for a new trial.2 He was again tried in August 1992, and convicted of manslaughter, second degree, and persistent felony offender, second degree.

Hollifield v. Com., 2003-CA-000212-- Not Published; Affirming -- PDF

Michael Charles Hollifield appeals from a judgment and probated sentence of twelve months’ imprisonment, and a fine of $100.00 entered by the Fayette Circuit Court pursuant to a jury verdict finding him guilty of Wanton Endangerment, Second Degree. We affirm.

Hopkins v Com, 2004-CA-000195 -- Not Published; Affirming -- PDF

Ronald R. Hopkins, pro se, appeals from an order of the Campbell Circuit Court overruling his motion to amend a presentence investigation report (PSI). Hopkins contends that the trial court erred by failing to amend the PSI, that the Commonwealth waived its opportunity to object to Hopkins’ version of the underlying events when it failed to reply to his counsel’s comments during the sentencing hearing, and that he was afforded ineffective assistance of counsel. find no merit to any of Hopkins’ contentions and for this reason we affirm the Campbell Circuit Court order overruling his motion.

Hosley v Com, 2003-CA-000018 -- Not To Be Published; Affirming -- PDF

Roger Lee Holsey appeals the denial of his RCr 11.42 motion for relief from the judgment of conviction and sentence. He alleges ineffective assistance of counsel at trial for failing to object to jury instructions that allowed the jury to convict under a complicity theory and for failing to pursue a theory that he was the victim of discriminatory prosecution. He also claims an abuse of discretion by the trial court for imposing consecutive, rather than concurrent, ten-year sentences as recommended by the jury. Finding no merit in any of these arguments, we affirm the trial court’s orders denying relief.

Hood v. Com., 2001-CA-001520 Not To Be Published; Affirming -- PDF

Herbert Hood brings this appeal from a November 20, 2000, judgment of the Whitley Circuit Court. We affirm. On October 28, 1998, appellee, along with two accomplices, Edward Clark and Andy Potter, allegedly burglarized a warehouse in Corbin, Kentucky and stole four big screen televisions. The televisions were later recovered on the premises of appellee’s aunt.

Horton v. Com., 2003-CA-000688-- Not Published; Affirming -- PDF

Damar A. Horton appeals from an opinion and order of the Jefferson Circuit Court denying his motions to vacate, set aside or correct a sentence pursuant to RCr 11.42 and to modify the judgment pursuant to CR 60.02(f). We affirm.

Houchins V Com, 2004-CA-000004--Not To Be Published; Affirming -- PDF

Darin Houchins, pro se, appeals from an order of the Henderson Circuit Court entered December 5, 2003, denying his motions to vacate sentence under Rule of Criminal Procedure (RCr) 11.42, for appointment of counsel, and for an evidentiary hearing. We affirm.

Howard v. Com., 2002-CA-002189 -- Not Published; Affirming -- PDF

On March 24, 2000, appellant was arrested on the charge of second degree assault. He was subsequently indicted by the Campbell County Grand Jury upon the same charge on April 20, 2000 (Action No. 2000-CR-00118).

Houston v. Com., 2003-CA-000206 Not Published; Affirming -- PDF

Matthew Kenny Houston appeals from the January 9, 2003, Opinion and Order of the Fayette Circuit Court. We affirm. Appellant was convicted of assault in the second degree (Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) 508.020) and with being a persistent felony offender in the first degree (KRS 532.080).

Howard v. Com, 2002-CA-001960-MR-- Not Published; Affirming -- PDF

Joshua Howard, Paul David Howard and John D. (Doug) Howard were convicted on three counts of bribery of a public official. They appeal alleging that: (1) the trial court improperly limited time to present their defense; (2) a prosecution witness provided false testimony to the jury; (3) the jury instruction on conspiracy did not require the jury to find all elements beyond a reasonable doubt; (4) the trial court erred when it permitted the Commonwealth to define legal terms to the jury; (5) racial remarks made by them on tapes introduced by the Commonwealth should have been deleted; and (6) the trial court erroneously denied their motions for directed verdicts. We affirm.

Hubbard V Com, 2003-CA-000284-- To Be Published; Reversing and Remanding -- PDF

Glen F. Hubbard appeals from the portion of a final judgment of the Campbell Circuit Court convicting him of operating a motor vehicle on a DUI-suspended license, second offense, while under the influence of intoxicants, in violation of KRS1 189A.090(2)(b). We reverse and remand.

Huff V Com, 2003-CA-000726-MR-- Not Published; 2003-CA-000855-MR Affirming-MR -- PDF

On April 2, 2002, Kentucky State Police Trooper Shannon Jones observed someone driving an all terrain vehicle (ATV) on U. S. 460, an activity prohibited on federal roads. Trooper Jones gave chase, but the driver of the ATV left the paved roadway and began to drive creek beds. Jones kept up as long as he could but eventually lost sight of the driver. He stopped at a nearby house, where the occupant informed the policeman that she thought the driver she observed was appellant, Billy Ray Huff.

Humphrey v. Com., 2003-CA-000906-MR &2003-CA-001112 To Be Published; Vacating and Remanding In Part, Affirming In Part -- PDF

Victor Lamont Humphrey (Humphrey) appeals from an order of the Jefferson Circuit Court denying his motion under RCr 11.42 seeking to vacate an earlier judgment of the Jefferson Circuit Court sentencing him to a total of 10 years in prison for two counts of complicity to commit second-degree arson. Humphrey was a juvenile at the time the offenses were committed.

Hutchins v. Com., 2002-CA-001039 Not Published; Affirming -- PDF

Appellant seeks relief from an order of the Hopkins Circuit Court which denied his “Motion to File Belated RCr 11.42 Motion.” The order disposing of the matter, which forms the basis of this appeal, fails to address the motion as one to file a belated RCr 11.42 motion, but rather as one disposing upon the merits.

Hutchins v. Com., 2002-CA-001039 Not Published; Affirming -- PDF

Appellant seeks relief from an order of the Hopkins Circuit Court which denied his “Motion to File Belated RCr 11.42 Motion.” The order disposing of the matter, which forms the basis of this appeal, fails to address the motion as one to file a belated RCr 11.42 motion, but rather as one disposing upon the merits.
Return to the Main Table of Cases