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.

Gabbard v. Com., 2002-SC-001091-MR - Not To Be Published, affirming -- PDF

Appellant, Grover Cliff Gabbard, was convicted of murder by a McLean Circuit Court jury and received a sentence of life imprisonment. His appeal comes before this Court as a matter of right. Ky. Const. § 110(2)(b) . Appellant asserts the following trial errors: 1) the improper admission of hearsay testimony, 2) the improper denial of a recusal motion, 3) the improper bolstering of the Commonwealth's witnesses, and 4) a misstatement concerning parole eligibility . For the reasons stated herein, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed

Gaffney v Com., 2004-SC-000144-MR - Not To Be Published, Affirming -- PDF

A jury of the Jefferson Circuit Court convicted Appellant of first degree rape and first degree sexual abuse against his daughter. For these crimes, Appellant was sentenced to a total of thirty years imprisonment. Appellant now appeals to this Court as a matter of right. Ky . Const. § 110(2)(b) . For the reasons set forth herein, we affirm Appellant's convictions .

Gerlaugh v Com,2002-SC-000382-MR -To Be Published, Reversing and Remanding -- PDF

Appellant, Steven A. Gerlaugh, was convicted by a Montgomery Circuit Court jury of robbery in the first degree and sentenced to twenty years in prison . He appeals to this Court as a matter of right, Ky. Const. § 110(2)(b), asserting the following claims of error, viz: (1) denial of a speedy trial; (2) improper eyewitness identification ; (3) admission of hearsay evidence ; (4) admission of a firearm that was not proven to have been connected to the crime ; (5) admission of the description and a photograph of an alleged but unidentified co-perpetrator; (6) admission of evidence of Appellant's postarrest silence; (7) insufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction . We reverse and remand for a new trial because of the improper admission of the hearsay evidence and the insufficiently identified firearm.

Goodan v. Com., 2003-SC-000657-MR - Not To Be Published, Affirming -- PDF -

Appellants, Jason Goodan and Jonathan Goodan, were each convicted of two counts of Second-Degree Arson and one count of Second-Degree Burglary. Both were sentenced to fifty years in prison, though Jason Goodan, who was found to be a Second-Degree Persistent Felony Offender (PFO), received an enhanced sentence of seventy years . Appellants argue that the trial court erred in denying a requested jury instruction on the unreliability of eyewitness testimony and in admitting KRE 404(b) evidence . The trial court's decision not to grant the requested jury instruction was proper under Evans v. Commonwealth ,' and no KRE 404(b) evidence was proffered at trial. Accordingly, we affirm Appellants' convictions .

Gotts v Com, 2003-SC-000500-MR - To Be Published, Affirming -- PDF

A Montgomery Circuit Court jury convicted Appellant, Anthony Monroe Potts, of three counts of trafficking in a controlled substance in the first degree, KRS 218A.1412, and found him to be a persistent felony offender in the first degree, KRS 532.080(3) . He was sentenced to a total of twenty years of imprisonment and appeals to this Court as a matter of right, Ky. Const. § 110(2)(b), claiming that the trial court committed reversible error by: (1) overruling his motion for a directed verdict of acquittal ; and (2) permitting the introduction of two inaudible videotapes and one inaudible audiotape of purported drug transactions . Finding no error, we affirm .

Gowans v Com, 2003-SC-000401-MR -Not To Be Published, Affirming -- PDF -

A Fayette Circuit Court jury convicted Appellant, James Gowans, of manslaughter in the first degree, KRS 507.030, and sentenced him to twenty years in prison . He appeals to this Court as a matter of right, Ky. Const. § 110(2)(b), claiming that the trial court committed reversible error by failing to give a proper "Allen charge" to a deadlocked jury and in refusing to grant a mistrial because of such failure . Finding no error, we affirm.

Grimes v Com., 2003-SC-001062_MR- Not To Be Published,Affirming -- PDF

This appeal is from a judgment based on a jury verdict that convicted Grimes of two counts of first-degree rape, six counts of first-degree sodomy, eight counts of firstdegree sexual abuse and one count of second-degree sexual abuse. He was sentenced to a total of fifty-nine years in prison . The questions presented are whether Grimes was entitled to instructions on lesser-included offenses to first-degree rape ; whether he was entitled to instructions on lesser-included offenses to other charges contained in the indictment; whether the prosecutor's arguing of facts not in the record was palpable error; whether an ex parte communication between the prosecutor and the trial judge prejudiced the defendant; whether the prosecutor misstated the in-court identification of the defendant by the victims ; whether the reference to the defendant as a salesman and to his appearance resulted in a manifest injustice; whether the defendant was required to characterize a prosecution witness as a liar; and whether an alleged unsolicited response by a witness was palpable error.

Gutierrez V Com., 2003-SC-000130-MR - To Be Published, Affirming -- PDF

Appellant, Ismael Gutierrez, was convicted of Murder, Unauthorized Use of a Motor Vehicle, First-Degree Burglary, Tampering with Physical Evidence, and Violation of a Domestic Violence Order (DVO), and he was sentenced to sixty years in prison . He claims that the trial court erred in its decision to allow the Commonwealth to use the violation of the DVO as a substantive charge and as an aggravating circumstance in the Murder charge . Because the validity of the DVO was not subject to challenge in this case, the trial court did not commit error in admitting this evidence, and we affirm Appellant's convictions.