Hunt v. Com.
| Decision Date | 15 December 1972 |
| Parties | Carl Lee HUNT and Howard Balley, Appellants, v. COMMONWEALTH of Kentucky, Appellee. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky |
Stanley C. Nickell, Greenup, for appellants.
Ed W. Hancock, Atty. Gen., Patrick B. Kimberlin, III, Asst. Atty. Gen., Frankfort, for appellee.
Carl Lee Hunt and Howard Bailey were convicted of stealing from a public building. KRS 433.180. Their punishment was fixed by a jury at five years' imprisonment in the state penitentiary. Hunt and Bailey appeal. We affirm.
On Monday morning, August 30, 1971, it was discovered that the United States Post Office in Vanceburg had been broken into sometime during the weekend. A typewriter, a money order punch machine, two adding machines, and approximately $18.00 in money were taken from the building. Later that same morning, Hunt, Bailey and a third person were seen near two cars parked on a farm road near the Ohio River. The farm was near Vanceburg and was rented by Ollie Mustard. The two cars were backed up toward one another in such fashion that the trunks of the automobiles were in close proximity. One automobile was a red and black 1969 Chevrolet with Texas license plates and the other automobile had Illinois license plates. When confronted by two sons of Mr. Mustard and two of their companions, the men around the automobiles stated that they were there to do some fishing. However, they had no fishing tackle. The men left in the automobiles after being requested to do so. After they left, the area near where the cars were parked was found strewn with small bits of paper identified and referred to in the evidence as 'punch outs.' Local authorities were called in to investigate. These 'punch outs' were determined to be of the same kind as those made by the money order machine which had been stolen from the post office. Mr. Mustard's sons and their companions positively identified Hunt and Bailey as being two of the men they saw at the river bank.
On September 9, 1971, state patrolman Ershell B. Shouse, Jr., who had participated in the investigation of the robbery of the post office, was driving west on Kentucky Highway #10 when he saw three men at a roadside park standing near a red and black 1969 Chevrolet with Texas license plates. Officer Shouse drove a short distance down the road, turned around, and drove back into the park. The three men near the Chevrolet ran into the woods. Officer Shouse apprehended two of the men--Howard Bailey and a person identified only as Litteral. Litteral was not tried with Hunt and Bailey. The officer saw Hunt run, but he escaped. Litteral and Bailey told the officer that they had been hitchhiking and that they did not know the driver of the Chevrolet.
The Chevrolet was left in the park under police surveillance for about four hours in the hope that Hunt would return. No one returned to the car. The police took control of the automobile and had it taken to Vanceburg. Shortly thereafter, the automobile was searched by police officers and several 'punch outs' were found on the front floor mat of the car. Many small bits of paper were found in the trunk of the car. The police officers unlocked the trunk with a key they had obtained from a search of Hunt's girlfriend's apartment. The key was found in the pocket of one of Hunt's shirts left in the apartment. The officers had a search warrant for the girl's apartment but she consented to the search. The search of the Chevrolet automobile was conducted without the benefit of a warrant. Through investigation, the officers ascertained that the Chevrolet automobile belonged to Foley Rent-A-Car from Houston, Texas. The car had been leased to Hunt for a two-day period, August 24--26, and had been reported stolen. Hunt was arrested on September 10, 1971 in a bar in Vanceburg.
The only issue...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Grissom
...car. See, e.g., State v. Asbury, 124 Ariz. 170, 602 P.2d 838 (1979); Thom v. State, 248 Ark. 180, 450 S.W.2d 550 (1970); Hunt v. Commonwealth, 488 S.W.2d 692 (Ky.1972). If the police do not objectively identify the suspect's vehicle during the chase, they cannot claim abandonment if they la......
-
State v. Achter
...highway by a fleeing suspect after a high speed chase by police. United States v. Edwards, 441 F.2d 749 (5th Cir. 1971); Hunt v. Commonwealth, 488 S.W.2d 692 (Ky.1972). 1 These courts reason that by leaving an automobile on a public thoroughfare with keys in the ignition the driver voluntar......
-
State v. Rynhart
...abandoned his vehicle when he left it parked on the roadside in anticipation of an encounter with the police); Hunt v. Commonwealth, 488 S.W.2d 692, 693-94 (Ky.Ct.App.1972) (concluding that the defendant abandoned his vehicle after he ran from the police and left his vehicle in a public par......
-
Wells v. Com.
...object to search after fleeing scene and abandoning vehicle); Whitlock v. State, 124 Ga.App. 599, 185 S.E.2d 90 (1971); Hunt v. Commonwealth, 488 S.W.2d 692 (Ky.1972); State v. Achter, 512 S.W.2d 894 (Mo.Ct.App.1974) (when pursued by patrolman, defendant left his car in the middle of the st......