2004 Unpublished Court of Appeals Opinions Index |
|
|
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.
J. E. a Child V Com, 2004-CA-000044--Not To Be Published;
Reversing and Remanding -- PDF
Jackson v. Com, 2003-CA-000898 -- Not Published;
Affirming -- PDF
Jameson V Com, 2003-CA-000967-- To Be Published;
Affirming In Part, Vacating In Part and Remanding -- PDF
Jefferson v Com., 2003-CA-001416-MR -- Not Published;
Affirming -- PDF
Jenkins v. Com., 2002-CA-001041 -- Not Published;
Affirming in Part, Vacating and Remanding in Part-- PDF
Jenkins V Com, 2003-CA-001783-MR &2003-CA-001112 Not To Be Published;
Affirming -- PDF
Johnson v. Com., 2003-CA-000121 Not To Be Published;
Affirming -- PDF
Johnson v. Com, 2003-CA-000351-MR-- Not Published;
Affirming -- PDF
Johnson v. Com., 2003-CA-000085-- Not Published;
Affirming -- PDF
Johnson v Com, 2002-CA-002455 -- Not To Be Published;
Affirming -- PDF Johnston v Com., 2003-CA-000625-MR -- Not Published;
Affirming -- PDF
Jones V Com, 2003-CA-002012--Not To Be Published;
Affirming -- PDF
Jones V Com, ,2003-CA-002178-- To Be Published; Reversing and Remanding -- PDF
Jones v. Com., 2003-CA-001028-- Not Published;
Affirming -- PDF
Jones v. Com., 2003-CA-000469-MR &2003-CA-001112 Not Published;
Affirming -- PDF
Jones v. Com, 2003-CA-001592 -Not To Be Published;
Affirming -- PDF
Jones v Com, 2002-CA-001865 --Not To Be Published;
Affirming -- PDF J.E., a minor child, appeals as a matter of
right from an adjudication of the Jefferson Family Court finding
her beyond control of parent and committing her to the custody
of the Cabinet for Families and Children (CFC). We reverse and
remand.
Brandon Scott Jackson appeals from a
judgment of the Kenton Circuit Court wherein he was convicted of
first-degree rape and sentenced to twelve years in prison. The
sole issue on appeal is whether certain statements made by
Jackson to police officers were properly admitted by the trial
court. We affirm.
Edward Green Jameson has petitioned for review
from an order of the McCracken Circuit Court entered on April
10, 2003, which affirmed an order of the McCracken District
Court denying Jameson’s motion to declare McCracken County
Ordinance No. 2000-4 unconstitutional and to dismiss the
criminal complaint against him.1 Having concluded that recent case law from the Supreme Court of the United States requires
that this matter be remanded for further fact-finding, but that
the McCracken District Court did not otherwise err by denying
Jameson’s motion, we affirm in part, vacate in part and remand
for further proceedings.
DoJuan Jefferson (“Jefferson”) appeals from the
judgment of the Jefferson Circuit Court, which denied his motion
seeking to vacate, set aside, and correct his convictions for
assault in the second degree and murder. We affirm.
Upon conclusion of a jury trial in February of 1998,
Jefferson was convicted of assault in the second degree and the murder of Dennis Goodwin (“Goodwin”). He was sentenced to five
(5) years for the second degree assault charge and thirty-five
(35) years for the murder charge. The Court ordered the sentences to run concurrently.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the
Fayette Circuit Court revoking Appellant’s probation and
sentencing him to ten years’ imprisonment. Having reviewed the
record, we affirm in part and vacate and remand in part for
findings of fact.
Willie Gene Jenkins appeals from an order of
the Jefferson Circuit Court denying his motions pursuant to RCr1
11.42 and CR2 60.02 to vacate his judgment and sentence. We
affirm.
Jenkins was convicted following a jury trial of
criminal syndication, sixteen counts of second-degree criminal possession of a forged instrument, eight counts of theft by
JUDGE: Robert Johnson appeals from an order of the
Campbell Circuit Court denying his CR1 60.02 motion to vacate the
judgment sentencing him to prison for criminal offenses. We
affirm.
Terry Johnson appeals the denial of his motion
for RCr 11.42 relief from a judgment convicting him of the
murder of his father, for which he was sentenced to life
imprisonment. The trial court denied the motion on the basis
that Johnson’s claims of ineffective assistance regarding his
representation by three different counsel failed to satisfy the
criteria set out in Strickland v. Washington,
Anthony Johnson appeals his conviction of two
drug-related offenses and of being a persistent felony offender
in the second degree. We affirm.
Daniel Johnson has appealed from the final judgment of the Kenton Circuit Court entered on October 17, 2002, which pursuant to a jury verdict, convicted him of manslaughter in the second degree,1 and assault in the fourth degree.2 Having concluded that (1) Johnson’s objection to the jury instructions was not properly preserved; (2) his proffered evidence was not preserved by an avowal; (3) the trial court did not err by denying Johnson’s motion for a mistrial following witnesses’ characterization of him as a “biker”; (4) the trial court did not err by denying Johnson’s motion for a directed verdict of acquittal; and (5) the trial court’s allowing cross- examination of Johnson regarding the Hell’s Angels bumper sticker on his motorcycle during the sentencing phase of the trial was harmless error, we affirm.
This appeal is from a judgment entered by
Morgan Circuit Court after a jury found appellant, Mark
Johnston, guilty of manslaughter in the second degree. The
trial court sentenced appellant in conformity with the jury’s
ten year recommendation. We affirm.
In June 1998, the Jefferson Circuit Court
convicted Beverly Jones, pursuant to her guilty plea, of firstdegree
assault,1 first-degree possession of a controlled
substance (cocaine),2 possession of drug paraphernalia,3 and second-degree escape.4 The court sentenced Jones to a total of
thirteen years’ imprisonment.
Charles Jones appeals from an order of the
Harlan Circuit Court denying his motion to suppress evidence
seized during a warrantless search. The Commonwealth argues
that, since the evidence was discovered during a brief stop and
frisk as authorized by the United States Supreme Court’s
decision in Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1, 88 S.Ct. 1868, 20 L.Ed.2d
889 (1968), the circuit court properly refused to suppress it.
We disagree because the contraband nature of the evidence was not immediately apparent; therefore, the officer’s order to Jones to remove said evidence from his pocket exceeded the scope
of a search authorized by Terry.
Terrance Anthony Jones has appealed from a
final judgment and sentence of the Jefferson Circuit Court
entered on April 16, 2003, which, following Jones’s conditional
guilty pleas to an amended charge of possession of a controlled
substance in the first degree1 and to being a persistent felony offender in the second degree (PFO II),2 sentenced Jones to five
years’ imprisonment.
Appellant Gus Durell Jones appeals the
judgment from the Fayette Circuit Court entering a conditional
guilty plea and sentencing him to five years imprisonment for
possession of a handgun by a convicted felon. The issue on
appeal is whether appellant’s right to a speedy trial was
violated. For the reasons stated hereafter, we affirm.
This appeal challenges the interpretation given
to a judgment of the Jefferson Circuit Court. Alvin R. Jones
pled guilty to escape in the second degree, enhanced by his
status as a second-degree persistent felony offender (PFO). He
was sentenced accordingly and imprisoned. Almost two years
later, he filed a motion with the sentencing court to end
further execution of his sentence, claiming the language of the
judgment had been improperly interpreted. The motion was denied. He later filed another motion for jail-time credit or
to cease further incarceration. Again, the motion was denied.
Jones now appeals the denial of those motions. Because the
judgment clearly sentenced Jones to five years’ imprisonment,
and because Jones is ineligible for any jail-time credit, we
affirm.
This is an appeal from a judgment convicting
appellant of two counts of trafficking in cocaine. Appellant
argues that the trial court erred in failing to authorize funds
for the employment of a voice analysis expert and by allowing the admission of evidence of prior bad acts (drug dealing) of
appellant. We reject these arguments and thus affirm.
Return
to the Main Table of Cases