2006 Unpublished Court of Appeals Opinions Index |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.
Laber
v Com.,2004-CA-002642
--Not Published ; Affirming
-- PDF
Lane v Com. 2004-CA-002479--Not To Be Published;
Affirming -- PDF Lattner v Com, 2005-CA-001239
-- Not Published ; Affirming
-- PDF
Lawrence v Com, 2005-CA-002075
-- Not Published ; Affirming
-- PDF
Lawton Jr V Com.,2005-CA-000386
-- Not Published ; Affirming
-- PDF
Lay Jr. v Com ,2005-CA-000516
- Published ;Affirming
-- PDF
Ledford V Com.,2004-CA-000749
-- Not Published ; Affirming
-- PDF
Leffler v Com, 2003-CA-002022
--Not To Be Published;
Affirming -- PDF Lehr v Com.,2005-CA-001092
-- Not Published, Affirming --
PDF
Leinenback v Com ,2005-CA-001873
- Not Published ;Affirming
-- PDF
Lester II V Com.,2004-CA-002660
-- Not Published ; Opinion and Order Affirming and Granting Motion for Leave to Withdraw
-- PDF
Lofton v Com, 2002-CA-001550
-- Not Published ; Affirming
-- PDF
Lovett v Com,2003-CA-002657
-- Not Published ; Affirming
-- PDF
Luke v Com.,2005-CA-000563
--Not Published, Affirming --
PDF
Lumpkin v Com., 2004-CA-001631
-- Not Published ; Affirming
-- PDF
Lunsford v Com, 2004-CA-001966--Not To Be Published;
Affirming -- PDF Luttrell V Com.,2004-CA-001786
-- Not Published ; Affirming -- PDF
Lyons v Com.,2005-CA-000291
--Not Published, Affirming --
PDF
Mark Joseph Laber appeals from his conviction
of possession of a handgun by a convicted felon. Having
reviewed the record and the applicable law, we affirm.
Appellant, Jeffrey Lane (Lane), appeals his conviction for burglary in the second degree and sexual abuse in the third degree. We affirm.
Jim Lattner appeals from a judgment of the
Fayette Circuit Court convicting him of illegal possession of a
controlled substance in the first degree and persistent felony
offender in the first degree. Following a jury verdict, the
court sentenced Lattner to 10 years’ imprisonment. Lattner
alleges three trial errors on appeal. We affirm.
Marcus Lawrence appeals from a September 21,
2005, judgment of the Warren Circuit Court convicting him
pursuant to his guilty plea of first-degree trafficking in
cocaine, in violation of KRS 218A.1412, and possession of
marijuana, in violation of KRS 218A.1422. The court sentenced
Lawrence to seven years in prison. Lawrence contends that the
court erred when it refused to suppress the drug evidence,
which, according to Lawrence, came to light only after a police officer had illegally stopped Lawrence’s vehicle. Convinced
that the stop and subsequent discovery of the drugs were lawful,
we affirm.
Joseph Harris Lawton, Jr. brings this pro se
appeal from a January 26, 2005, order of the Fayette Circuit
Court summarily denying his Ky. R. Crim. P. (RCr) 11.42 motion
to vacate sentence. We affirm.
Danny Lay, Jr., appeals from a judgment
entered by the Casey Circuit Court after he pled guilty to two
charges. For the reasons stated hereafter, we affirm.
Billy Joe Ledford has appealed from two orders
of the Menifee Circuit Court denying his motions to suppress
evidence obtained from confidential communications he had with
his psychotherapist on the grounds that such communications were
privileged pursuant to KRE 507. We affirm.
Facing a life sentence on multiple rape, sodomy, and sexual abuse charges involving his adopted daughter, James Leffler made a plea agreement with the Commonwealth in which he pleaded guilty to one count each of first-degree rape1 (victim under the age of twelve), a Class A felony, and second-degree sodomy,2 a Class C felony, in return for recommended sentences of twenty years and ten years, respectively, to be served concurrently. As part of the agreement, the remaining four felony charges in the indictment were dropped. The circuit court ultimately sentenced Leffler in accord with the agreement.
Matthew Lehr appeals his conviction for
criminal abuse in the second degree stemming from severe
injuries sustained by a five-month-old infant left in his care
while her mother was at work. Three issues are presented for
review: 1) whether the trial court erred in instructing the jury
on lesser included offenses; 2) whether appellant was denied his right to a unanimous verdict; and 3) whether the trial judge
erred in striking for cause a juror who indicated he could
render a fair and impartial verdict. We affirm.
A Hancock Circuit Court jury convicted Randy
Leinenbach3 of first-degree rape and first-degree unlawful
imprisonment for which he received a sentence of 15 years’ imprisonment. This is his direct appeal from the judgment of
conviction and sentence. We affirm.
Jerry Kenneth Lester II entered a conditional
plea of guilty to burglary in the third degree, fleeing or evading police in the second degree and being a persistent
felony offender in the first degree. His conditional plea
reserved for appeal the arguments he raised in his suppression
hearing. At his suppression hearing, Lester alleged police did
not have probable cause to arrest.
This matter comes to us on remand from the
Kentucky Supreme Court. After examining the record and the
supplemental arguments of counsel, we conclude that we must
affirm the trial court’s decision to deny William Lofton’s
Kentucky Rules of Civil Procedure (CR) 60.02 post-conviction
motion.
These are appeals from orders of the
Marshall Circuit Court, denying Todd Lovett’s motions made
pursuant to Kentucky Rule of Criminal Procedure (RCr) 11.42 and
Kentucky Rule of Civil Procedure (CR) 60.02. The appeals have
been consolidated for purposes of assignment to the same panel
of this Court.Lovett was indicted on February 2, 2000, on various
drug charges stemming from a search pursuant to a warrant that
police conducted at his home. The police found items and
ingredients that are used in the manufacture of methamphetamine,
as well as other drug paraphernalia.
Kenneth Luke appeals from a March 7, 2005,
judgment of the Daviess Circuit Court sentencing him to fourteen
years’ imprisonment for the offense of first-degree
manslaughter.1 In the early morning hours of January 31, 2004,
Luke killed Robert Neal by cutting his neck with a knife. A
jury found that Luke caused Neal’s death while intending to
seriously injure him. Luke maintains that the trial court erred
by failing to excuse certain jurors for cause and by excluding from evidence tape recorded statements Neal’s widow gave to
police that were inconsistent with her testimony at trial.
Convinced that the court did not err with respect to the jurors
and that any error with respect to Ms. Neal’s statements was
harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, we affirm.
James Anthony Lumpkin appeals from a judgment
and sentence of the Bell Circuit Court in a multi-count criminal
proceeding. Lumpkin contends that the trial court erred in
failing to direct a verdict in his favor on the counts of
second-degree burglary and any lesser-included offenses, and
first-degree possession of a controlled substance. For the
following reasons, we affirm.
Richard Lunsford appeals from a judgment of the Jessamine Circuit Court wherein he was convicted of four counts of first-degree wanton endangerment and sentenced to ten years in prison. Lunsford raises three arguments and contends that a resolution of any of them in his favor should result in his being granted a new trial. Having reviewed the matter, we affirm.
Luttrell v Com.,2004-CA-002277
-- Not Published ;Affirming
-- PDF
Larry Luttrell (Larry) appeals the trial
court’s denial after an evidentiary hearing on a RCr 11.42
motion for relief from his guilty plea. Initially, Larry was
indicted for first degree trafficking in a controlled substance,
manufacturing methamphetamine and being a persistent felony
offender in the second degree (PFO II). He pled guilty to first
degree trafficking in a controlled substance and received a
sentence of ten years. Larry argues that his plea was
involuntary because his attorney failed to tell him that he
could not be convicted of the manufacturing charge as all the
chemicals necessary for its manufacture were not present. Larry
claims that he pled guilty to trafficking under the threat of
the more serious manufacturing charge. Larry asserts that had
he been informed of a defense to the manufacturing charge,
however, he would not have pled guilty and would have insisted
on going to trial. Because we conclude that counsel’s
performance under the circumstances was not deficient, we
affirm.
Larry Luttrell brings Appeal No. 2004-CA-001786-
MR from an August 5, 2004, Opinion and Order of the Jefferson
Circuit Court summarily denying his Ky. R. Crim. P. (RCr) 11.42
motion to vacate his twenty-year sentence. Luttrell also brings
Appeal No. 2005-CA-000744-MR from a March 8, 2005, Opinion and
Order of the Jefferson Circuit Court summarily denying his RCr 11.42 motion to vacate his twenty-year sentence in a separate
indictment. We affirm.
Appellant, John W. Lyons (Lyons), appeals a jury
verdict finding him guilty of fraudulent insurance acts over
$300. We affirm the jury’s verdict.
Return
to the Main Table of Cases