LexisNexis
  

Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!

Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!

While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.


   State Courts - Kentucky - June 15, 2006

  
B.F. v. T.D., 2005-SC-000557-DG, SUPREME COURT OF KENTUCKY, June 15, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free  

Overview: Because a co-habitant failed to meet the statutory requirements of former Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 403.420, and Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 403.270 to be deemed a de facto custodian, and because the child was in the custody of her adoptive mother, the co-habitant lacked standing to claim custody.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Bailey v. Commonwealth, 2003-SC-0935-DG, SUPREME COURT OF KENTUCKY, June 15, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free  

Overview: Defendant's confession was properly suppressed because his interrogation for alleged sexual abuse of a minor was psychologically coercive in light of his moderate mental retardation. Substantial evidence, including his complete inability to understand his Miranda warnings, showed that he confessed only to satisfy the officers as authority figures.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Baker v. Fletcher, 2005-SC-000208-TG, SUPREME COURT OF KENTUCKY, June 15, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free  

Overview: Trial court did not err in finding General Assembly had power to retroactively suspend Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 18A.355, granting annual salary increase to state employees of not less than five percent; General Assembly clearly manifested its intent to do so, which met Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 446.080(3) requirement permitting retroactive construction.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Baraka v. Commonwealth, 2004-SC-0256-DG, SUPREME COURT OF KENTUCKY, June 15, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free  

Overview: Because "homicide by heart attack" was widely accepted in the scientific community, and because an expert could rely upon the circumstances of a victim's death provided by police officers, pursuant to Ky. R. Evid. 703(a), the expert's opinion was helpful in determining whether stress from a physical altercation caused the victim's heart attack.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Bowling v. Commonwealth, 2005-SC-0712-MR, SUPREME COURT OF KENTUCKY, June 15, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free  

Overview: State supreme court rejected an inmate's argument that Roper v. Simmons and the Eight Amendment barred his execution because he had the "mental age" of an 11-year-old boy, since Roper prohibited the execution of only those offenders whose chronological age was below 18 at the time of the commission of the offense.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
City of Louisville v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 2004-SC-0048-DG, SUPREME COURT OF KENTUCKY, June 15, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free  

Overview: Because a city opted not to provide basic reparation benefits coverage for its vehicles, neither the city, its employee, nor the vehicle were "secured" under Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 304.39-020, 304.39-060, 304.39-080; therefore, the city and its employee were subject to being sued by a subrogated insurer under Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 304.39-070(2).

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Commonwealth v. Fields, 2004-SC-0417-DG, SUPREME COURT OF KENTUCKY, June 15, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free  

Overview: Motion to suppress evidence seized when a search of defendant's person was made incident to an arrest for criminal trespass was properly denied because the officer had a reasonable suspicion that defendant was committing the trespass when he was on city property without explanation. The arrest was valid under Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 431.005.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Commonwealth v. Green, 2004-SC-000534-DG, SUPREME COURT OF KENTUCKY, June 15, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free  

Overview: First offense DUI was a petty offense for which Ky. R. Crim. P. 9.26(1) did not require a jury trial, but a bench trial should not have been granted in defendant's first-offense DUI prosecution because it had originally been scheduled for jury trial, which triggered the requirement in Rule 9.26(1) for the consent of the Commonwealth of Kentucky.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Commonwealth v. Lucas, 2004-SC-0075-DG, SUPREME COURT OF KENTUCKY, June 15, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free  

Overview: Defendant's statements did not have to be suppressed; he was not in custody during two interviews, and Miranda warnings were not required. Any reasonable person would have felt free to leave; that an officer had an arrest warrant for first assault charge and planned to arrest him at end of second interview did not mean that he was in custody then.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Denzik v. Denzik, 2004-SC-1131-DG, SUPREME COURT OF KENTUCKY, June 15, 2006, Rendered
View this case - free  

Overview: A jury verdict for a former husband had to be reinstated; ample evidence showed that his former wife knew that he was not her child's biological father and that she deliberately concealed the fact from him. Such evidence was sufficient to support verdict awarding husband damages for fraudulent misrepresentation, based on his child support payments.

Search Cases for Free|Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers|Case Summary Email Service - 50% off

  
Back to Top
  

  www.lexisnexis.com |  About LexisNexis |  Terms & Conditions |  Customer Support |  Sitemap |  Contact Us
  CopyrightŠ 2008  LexisNexis®  All rights reserved.