2005 Unpublished Court of Appeals Opinions Index |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.
Taylor v Com, 2004-CA-000056 -- Not To Be
Published; Affirming -- PDF
Taylor v Com, 2004-CA-001269
-- Not Published ; Affirming -
-- PDF
Taylor v Com, 2004-CA-001339
-- Not Published ; Affirming -
-- PDF
Tharp v Com, 2002-CA-002372 -- Not To Be
Published; Vacating and Remanding -- PDF
Tharp v Com, 2002-CA-002372
-- Not Published ; Vacating and Remanding -- PDF
Theodisis v Com, 2004-CA-002517
-- Not Published ; Affirming -
-- PDF
Thompson v Com, 2003-CA-001534--Not To Be
Published; Affirming -- PDF
Thompson v Com., 2004-CA-002294
--Not To Be Published ; Affirming
-- PDF
Treadway v Com, 2004-CA-000272
--Not To Be Published ; Affirming
-- PDF
Truglia V Com, 2003-CA-002369--Not To Be Published;
Affirming -- PDF
Tucker v Com, 2004-CA-001168
-- Not to be Published ;Vacating and Remanding -- PDF
Tungate v Com, 2004-CA-000434 -- Not To Be
Published; Affirming -- PDF
Turner v Com, 2003-CA-000847--Not To Be
Published; Affirming -- PDF
Turner v Com, 2004-CA-001796
-- Not Published ; Affirming -- PDF
Turner v Com, 2003-CA-002284
--To Be Published ; Reversing and Remanding -- PDF
Turner v Com, 2004-CA-002537
-- Not Published ; Affirming -- PDF
Turpin v Com, 2003-CA-002750
-- Not Published ; Affirming -- PDF
Tyler v Com, 2004-CA-001666
-- Not Published ; Affirming -- PDF
Tyler v Com,2003-CA-002623
-- Published ; Affirming -- PDF
Law enforcement officers arrived at Lisa Gail
Taylor’s home and informed her that they were there on a tip
that she was making and selling methamphetamine. According to
the officers, Taylor then agreed to a search of her residence.
Taylor said she only agreed to let them “look around.” But the ensuing search of Taylor’s home uncovered methamphetamine,
evidence of its manufacture, and marijuana.
Appellant, Fred Taylor Jr. (Taylor), appeals Pro
Se the Jefferson Circuit Court’s denial of his motion pursuant
to CR 60.02(f). We affirm the trial court’s ruling. Taylor was accused of stealing credit cards from the
complaining witness. The cards were worth more than $100 each. Taylor raised
no issues on appeal that the record fails to address. No
reversible error has been shown in the court’s denial of the
request for evidentiary hearing.
Eric Taylor appeals from the decision of the Carter Circuit Court convicting him of one count of Sexual Abuse in the First Degree. The two issues before the court are whether the trial court abused its discretion in not awarding Taylor probation instead of incarceration and whether the trial court abused its discretion by not making statutorily required findings that imprisonment was necessary. We affirm.
Myrna Tharp appeals from an order of the
McCracken Circuit Court that denied her motion for relief filed
pursuant to RCr 2 11.42, which included a motion for an
evidentiary hearing and for appointment of counsel.
Myrna Tharp appeals from an order of the
McCracken Circuit Court that denied her motion for relief filed
pursuant to RCr2 11.42, which included a motion for an
evidentiary hearing and for appointment of counsel. Myrna argues that the trial court erred in summarily denying her
motion. She contends that she raised numerous allegations
relating to her trial counsel’s deficient performance in
defending her on charges of murder and conspiracy to murder.
She claims that those allegations are not refuted on the face of
the record. After our review of the proceedings, we agree that
the trial court failed to make the requisite finding as to
whether the record on its face negates her allegations.
Gus S. Theodosis appeals from an order of the Jefferson Circuit Court denying his motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to RCr2 11.42. Theodosis contends that he received ineffective assistance of counsel in association with his conviction for first-degree sexual abuse because trial counsel failed to interview a witness and to call the witness to testify at trial. Because Theodosis has failed to establish that there is a reasonable probability that the outcome of his trial would have been different if trial counsel had interviewed and called the witness at trial, we affirm.
On April 12, 2001, the McCracken Circuit Court
entered a judgment confirming a jury verdict which convicted
John Michael Thompson of sodomy in the first degree and
sentenced him to twenty years’ imprisonment. The Kentucky
Supreme Court affirmed his conviction.1 Thereafter, Thompson
filed a pro se motion pursuant to RCr 11.42 to set aside his
conviction. The trial court denied the motion without appointing counsel or conducting an evidentiary hearing.
Finding no error, we affirm.
On February 1, 2004, Bobby Harper, Jr., noticed that his garage had been burglarized. Harper notified the sheriff’s office, and he gave a detailed list of the items (estimated to be worth $17,000.00) he deemed missing. Two weeks later, Harper received a phone call advising him of the location of some of his missing property. Harper drove to the address he had been given and was able to identify several of the items. He again notified the sheriff’s department. Randa Willingham, the tenant to whom the storage building had been leased, permitted a search of the premises. Objects belonging to Harper which were recovered included two race car transmissions, a Honda generator, a welder, a power washer, and a jumper box.
Darrell Treadway (Treadway) appeals from the judgment of the Lincoln Circuit Court convicting him of first-degree robbery and sentencing him to ten years’ imprisonment. He argues that the trial court improperly denied his request for a directed verdict, improperly instructed the jury, and excluded his rebuttal witness. In addition, he filed a post-trial motion challenging the competency of one of the Commonwealth’s witnesses, and he now adds a complaint about a statement from
the Commonwealth’s closing argument. We disagree that any of these issues raised on appeal provide a basis for granting him relief; thus, the trial court’s judgment is affirmed.
Michael Joseph Truglia brings this appeal from
an October 22, 2003, final judgment on a jury verdict in the
Fayette Circuit Court convicting him of theft by unlawful taking
and of being a persistent felony offender. We affirm.
Chris Tucker brings this pro se appeal from a
March 17, 2004, Order summarily denying his Ky. R. Civ. P. (RCr)
11.42 motion to vacate his 20 year sentence of imprisonment
entered upon a guilty plea. We vacate and remand.
Sandy Leo Tungate, pro se, appeals from an
order entered by the Boyle Circuit Court on February 10, 2004,
which denied his post-conviction motion for relief filed
pursuant to RCr2 11.42. We conclude that the trial court
correctly denied the motion as having been untimely filed; thus,
we affirm.
Angelita Turner has appealed from the judgment
of the Calloway Circuit Court convicting her of Second Degree
Manslaughter, and sentencing her to ten years imprisonment, for
causing the death of her newborn daughter by asphyxiation. On
appeal, Turner raises issues concerning the denial of her
motions for directed verdict, her ability to discover
information about and cross-examine an expert witness of the
Commonwealth, and the inclusion of an instruction for Second
Degree Manslaughter. We affirm.
Joe Turner, pro se, appeals from the
circuit court’s denial of his RCr2 10.10 motion. He alleges that
the circuit court erred when it refused to amend his judgment of
conviction to reflect that he was found guilty of wanton murder
and not murder. He also alleges that the trial court
erroneously denied his motion to proceed in forma pauperis on
appeal and that the Commonwealth “constructively amended the indictment” in violation of the double jeopardy provisions of
the United States Constitution3 and the Kentucky Constitution.4
We find that no prejudicial error occurred and affirm.
Tressie Turner appeals from a Harlan
Circuit Court judgment based on a jury verdict finding her
guilty of theft by failure to make required disposition of
property.2 Turner had signed a document that assigned $7,000.00
in proceeds from a workers’ compensation settlement to Richard Davis in payment for a used Lincoln Town Car. When she received
the workers’ compensation settlement benefits, Turner did not
turn the money over to Davis, and she kept the car. Upon
conviction, Turner was sentenced to serve one year in prison.
Her sentence was probated for five years, and she was ordered to
pay $7,000.00 in restitution to Davis.
Teddy A. Turner (Turner) has petitioned for
review of an opinion of the Workers' Compensation Board (Board)
entered on November 12, 2004, which affirmed an order of the
chief administrative law judge (CALJ) rendered June 17, 2004,
overruling Turner's motion to reopen his coal workers'
pneumoconiosis (CWP) claim. We affirm.
On February 3, 1986, Michael Turpin was stabbed
to death by Keith Bouchard with the aid of Karen Brown.
Michael’s body was dumped into a pond on Lakeside Golf Course in
Lexington, Kentucky. Indictments were returned versus Bouchard,
Brown, and Elizabeth Turpin, Michael’s widow and the beneficiary
of his $50,000 life insurance policy. The death penalty was
sought against all three. Bouchard entered a guilty plea and
agreed to testify against Brown and Turpin, who were tried
together. Each of the women was found guilty of murder and
received a sentence of life without the possibility of parole
for twenty-five years.
Appellant Terry W. Tyler (Tyler), pro se, brings
this appeal from an order of the Henderson Circuit Court,
entered July 15, 2004, summarily overruling his successive pro
se motion made pursuant to Kentucky Rules of Criminal Procedure
(RCr) 11.42. Having concluded that the trial court correctly
denied the motion as untimely, we affirm.
Charles William Tyler, pro se, has appealed
from an order of the Marion Circuit Court entered on November
24, 2003, which denied his motion requesting credit towards his
Kentucky prison sentence for 4,657 days he served in federal
custody before his arrest on Kentucky charges. Having concluded that the trial court did not err in denying Tyler credit for the
previously served time, we affirm.
Return
to the Main Table of Cases