2007 Unpublished Court of Appeals Opinions Index

Table of Cases
L

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.


Latendresse v Com, 2005-ca-002431 -- Not To Be Published; Affirming -- PDF

Francis E. Latendresse appeals from a final judgment entered upon a jury verdict by the Hardin Circuit Court convicting him of nine counts of complicity to commit diverting charitable gaming funds, $300 or more, and nine counts of complicity to commit theft by failure to make required disposition of property over $300, and sentencing him to 13 months on each count, to be served concurrently. For the reasons stated below, we affirm.

Lawrence v Com, 2005-ca-002624 -- Not To Be Published; Affirming -- PDF

Henry Lawrence appeals from a judgment of the Warren Circuit Court finding him guilty of first-degree trafficking. He argues the trial court erred in denying his motions for a directed verdict due to the lack of credibility of the Commonwealth's eyewitnesses. However, the Kentucky Supreme Court has previously determined that “judgment as to the credibility of witnesses and the weight of the evidence are left exclusively to the jury.” Fairrow v. Commonwealth, 175 S.W.3d 601, 609 (Ky. 2005). Consequently, the trial court's judgment is affirmed.

Linde v Com, 2005-CA-001869 --Not To Be Published; Affirming -- PDF

Michael Linde appeals from a Boone Circuit Court order that denied his Kentucky Rule of Civil Procedure (CR) 60.03 motion seeking to set aside payment of the restitution ordered on his conviction for evading police, criminal mischief, wanton endangerment, and assault associated with an automobile chase. Linde contends that he should not be required to pay restitution for damage to some police vehicles compensated for by private insurance coverage.

Long v Com, 2005-CA-000861 --Not To Be Published; Affirming -- PDF

Walter Long brings this appeal after having entered a conditional guilty plea3 in Boone Circuit Court on March 23, 2005. The issues on appeal concern whether Long was afforded sufficient opportunity to controvert the information contained in his Pre-Sentence Investigation Report4 (PSI), and whether trial courts are obligated to make factual findings with respect to disputed portions. For the following reasons, we affirm.

Luttrell v Com, 2006-CA-000566 -- Not To Be Published; Affirming -- PDF

John David Luttrell was convicted of theft by unlawful taking under $300.00 and third-degree burglary following a jury trial in Casey Circuit Court. He was sentenced to a total of five years’ imprisonment. On appeal, Luttrell argues that he was entitled to a directed verdict of acquittal. We affirm.
Return to the Main Table of Cases