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.

Ramsey v. Com.,2002-SC-000842-MR - To Be Published, Affirming -- PDF -

A Pulaski Circuit Court jury convicted Larry Ramsey of first-degree wanton endangerment, DUI (4th offense), and driving with a suspended license (3rd offense). He was also found guilty of being a first-degree persistent felony offender. He was sentenced to ten years' imprisonment on each of the counts, with two of the sentences to run consecutively, for a total of twenty years' imprisonment. He therefore appeals as a matter of right, arguing that (1) the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction of first-degree wanton endangerment; and (2) the trial court erred in admitting evidence of "prior bad acts." We affirm Appellant's convictions in full.

Richardson v. Com., 2003-SC-000654-MR - To Be Published, Affirming -- PDF

Appellant, Steven Thomas Richardson, was convicted in the Franklin Circuit Court of first-degree rape, first-degree sodomy, second-degree rape, second-degree sodomy, and two counts of first-degree sexual abuse . He was sentenced to forty years' imprisonment and appeals to this Court as a matter of right. Finding no error, we affirm . Appellant's convictions stem from acts committed against J .R ., a mentally handicapped minor, from the time she was about eleven years old until sometime after her thirteenth birthday. J .R.'s grandmother was the manager of the apartment complex where Appellant lived, and apparently J .R. and her mother had known Appellant since J.R. was four or five years old . The evidence indicated that J.R.'s mother frequently allowed J .R. to spend the night with Appellant, and that he often bought J .R. clothes and other presents .

Rine v Com, 2002-SC-001079-MR -Not To Be Published, Affirming -- PDF -

A Warren Circuit Court jury convicted April Rine of wanton murder and seconddegree criminal abuse in connection with the drowning death of her three-year-old granddaughter, D . F . Rine received consecutive sentences of thirty-five years' imprisonment for the wanton murder conviction and ten years' imprisonment for the second-degree criminal abuse conviction . Rine's co-defendant and daughter, Tammitha Fuentes, was convicted of complicity to murder and first-degree criminal abuse and received a total of thirty-five years' imprisonment. Both appeal to this Court as a matter of right. The cases have been consolidated for purposes of this opinion. Finding no error as to either Rine or Fuentes, we affirm all convictions.

Roach v Com., 2003-SC-000402-MR -Not To Be Published, Affirming -- PDF

Appellant, Chantel Roach, was convicted of murder and first-degree criminal abuse. The jury recommended a sentence of forty years for murder and ten years for criminal abuse, to run consecutively for a total of fifty years. The trial court entered a judgment consistent with the jury's recommendation . Appellant appeals to this Court as a matter of right,' asserting (1) that consolidation of Appellant's trial with that of her co-defendant was reversible error; and (2) that a violation of the Bruton2 rule was reversible error. Having considered both of Appellant's claims of error, we affirm the conviction.

Robertson v. Com., 2003-SC-000948-DG -To Be Published, Reversing and Remanding -- PDF

In 1997, Appellant, Louis Robertson, was convicted by a Nelson Circuit Court jury of five counts of sodomy in the first degree and five counts of sexual abuse in the first degree and sentenced to 100 years in prison. We affirmed his convictions and sentences by an opinion rendered on February 11, 1999. Appellant claims that on February 5, 2002, while incarcerated in the Eastern Kentucky Correctional Complex (EKCC), he delivered a properly prepared and addressed pro se RCr 11 .42 motion to vacate, set aside or correct his sentence, along with other related motions, to the EKCC legal mail clerk for mailing. In support of this claim, he has filed a copy of what purports to be the EKCC "Legal Mail Log Record" for that date, which reflects two items of mail received from Appellant, one addressed to the Commonwealth's Attorney for the Tenth Judicial Circuit (which includes the Nelson Circuit Court) and the other addressed to the Nelson Circuit Court clerk. However, the RCr 11 .42 motion was not "filed" in the office of the Nelson Circuit Court clerk until February 25, 2002, twenty days after Appellant claims to have delivered it to the prison legal mail clerk and fourteen days after the expiration of the three-year period of limitation for filing such a motion. RCr 11 .42(10). The Nelson Circuit Court dismissed the motion as untimely filed, and the Court of Appeals affirmed. We now reverse and remand to the Nelson Circuit Court for an evidentiary hearing to determine whether the three-year period of limitation was equitably tolled in this case.

Robinson v. Com., 2004-SC-000050-MR - To Be Published, Affirming In Part Reversing in Part and Remanding -- PDF

The Appellant, David Lee Robinson, was convicted by the Grayson Circuit Court of Manufacturing Methamphetamine, First-Degree Trafficking in a Controlled Substance (Methamphetamine), Possession of Marijuana, and Possession of Drug Paraphenalia . He was sentenced to 20 years for manufacturing and ten 10 years for trafficking, 12 months and a $500 fine for possession of marijuana and 12 months and a $500 fine for possession of drug paraphenalia . The court ordered the felony sentences be run consecutively for a total of thirty (30) years and the misdemeanor sentences were to run concurrent therewith . For the reasons set forth herein, we affirm the Appellant's convictions on all counts, but reverse and remand for a new sentencing phase.

Rodriquez v. Com., 2003-SC-000619-MR -Not To Be Published, Affirming -- PDF

Pursuant to the advice of his public defender, Appellant, Edwardo Rodriguez, entered a guilty plea to a charge of murder in exchange for a recommendation of a minimum sentence of twenty years . Before sentencing, however, Appellant hired a private attorney and moved to withdraw his guilty plea . The trial court denied the motion, and Appellant now appeals, claiming the trial court abused its discretion because his guilty plea was a result of ineffective assistance of counsel. We disagree, and we affirm the trial court.

Rogers v. Com, 2004-SC-000996-MR - Not To Be Published, Affirming -- PDF

Appellant, Charles Ray Rogers, was convicted by a McCracken Circuit Court jury of first-degree rape . The jury recommended a twenty year sentence, and the trial court entered judgment accordingly . Appellant appeals to this Court as a matter of right. Ky. Const § 110 (2)(b) . For the reasons stated herein, we affirm.