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.

Lester v. Com., 2003-SC-000051-MR - Published, Affirming -- PDF -

Appellant, Billy Lester, was convicted of three counts of first-degree sodomy, one count of first-degree sexual abuse, and one count of second-degree sexual abuse. He was sentenced to a total of twenty years' imprisonment and appeals to this Court as a matter of right . For the reasons set forth below, we affirm the judgment of the Pike Circuit Court.

Lickliter v. Com, 2002-SC-000487-MR - To Be Published, Affirming -- PDF -

This appeal is from a judgment based on a jury verdict which convicted Lickliter of murder and tampering with physical evidence. He was sentenced to a total of twenty-five years in prison . The questions presented are whether Lickliter was entitled to instructions on voluntary intoxication, second-degree manslaughter and insanity; whether the trial judge properly denied the motion to suppress Lickliter's confession ; whether testimony regarding the decomposition of the victim's body was reversible error; and whether reversible error occurred with respect to the jury instructions on reasonable doubt, firstdegree manslaughter and other instructions .

Little v. Com., 2003-SC-000276-MR - Not Published, Affirming -- PDF -

This appeal is from a jury verdict convicting Little of murder and first degree assault and sentencing him to twenty years in prison . The questions presented are : (1) whether an inadequate foundation was laid by the Commonwealth before positing expert testimony under KRE 702; and, (2) whether KRS 507.020(1)(b) is constitutional without proving a single act that manifests a conscious disregard of extreme indifference to human life by the defendant.

Logan v. Com ;2002-SC-000942-MR - Not To Be Published, Affirming -- PDF -

Charles Logan was convicted of murdering Bobby Gilbert and sentenced to twenty-five years imprisonment. He appeals to this Court as a matter of right.' On May 24, 2001, Logan shot Gilbert in the back in broad daylight with four witnesses looking on . Logan does not dispute the facts, and does not claim innocence . He argues, rather, that this Court should overturn the jury verdict because his statements to police were involuntary and were therefore improperly admitted at trial. In the alternative, Logan seeks a reversal of his conviction because the prosecution was improperly allowed to present hearsay evidence . We disagree, and affirm Logan's conviction .