Bailey v. Com.
| Decision Date | 28 September 1973 |
| Citation | 502 S.W.2d 48 |
| Parties | Luther Alonzo BAILEY, Jr., Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH of Kentucky, Appellee. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky |
Victor W. Dungan, David Kaplan, Stuart L. Lyon, Louisville, for appellant.
Ed W. Hancock, Atty. Gen., John M. Famularo, Asst. Atty. Gen., Frankfort, for appellee.
VANCE, Commissioner.
In a four-count indictment the appellant was accused of the murder and the armed robbery of James Harold Wilkins on February 25, 1972. He was also accused of the armed robbery of Franklin Jones on March 1, 1972, and of the offense on that same date of operating a motor vehicle without the consent of the owner.
All counts of the indictment were tried together and he was convicted of voluntary manslaughter in the death of Wilkins and sentenced to twenty-one years. He was convicted of armed assault with intent to rob Wilkins and sentenced to ninety-nine years. He was convicted of armed robbery of Franklin Jones and sentenced to twenty years and also sentenced to five years upon conviction of the offense of operating a motor vehicle without the owner's consent. The sentences were ordered to run consecutively.
On February 25, 1972, James Wilkins, an operator of a Yellow Cab, was found shot to death in his cab and his wallet which he had been carrying earlier in the day was missing. Five days later Franklin Jones, the operator of a Checker Cab, was robbed at gunpoint and the taxicab driven away by the robber. On the same day the appellant was arrested while operating the stolen taxicab and a pistol was discovered on the front seat. Two Checker Cab receipts and some currency were found upon his person. He was identified by Franklin Jones as his assailant.
Upon his arrest he was interrogated by police officers who first read to him from a card a detailed explanation of the so-called 'Miranda Rights.' Without requesting assistance of counsel the appellant answered questions and confessed to the shooting and attempted robbery of Wilkins but stated that he did not obtain any money from him.
There is no contention that the evidence is not sufficient to support the verdict as to the robbery of Franklin Jones and the unlawful operation of the taxicab.
The appellant contends that he was entitled to a directed verdict as to the charge of armed robbery of the deceased Wilkins and that the court erred in giving an instruction on the crime of armed assault with intent to rob.
The basis for this claim is that the only evidence of the alleged attempted robbery of Wilkins was the out-of-court confession of appellant and this, he claims, will not support a verdict absent other evidence that such crime was committed . RCr 9.60.
The evidence that Wilkins had a wallet on his person during the day that he was shot and that it was missing when his dead body was discovered is independent evidence sufficient to corroborate the confession.
Appellant contends however that if the proof is sufficient to establish the actual commission of a robbery, the court should...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Slaughter v. Com.
...a theft. A jury would be totally justified in so believing. Trowel v. Commonwealth, Ky., 550 S.W.2d 530 (1977). In Bailey v. Commonwealth, Ky., 502 S.W.2d 48 (1974), we held that the fact that the victim had a wallet on his person during the day he was shot, and that it was missing when his......