Lowry v. Com.

Decision Date23 February 1968
Citation424 S.W.2d 841
PartiesDonnie E. LOWRY, Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH of Kentucky, Appellee.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky

Robert L. Gullette, Nicholasville, for appellant.

Robert Matthews, Atty. Gen., James H. Barr, Asst. Atty. Gen., Frankfort, for appellee.

MONTGOMERY, Judge.

Donnie E. Lowry appeals from a judgment of conviction of grand larceny. He was sentenced to serve one year in the penitentiary. The question involved on the appeal is whether the circuit court had jurisdiction to try the appellant on an indictment made after he became eighteen years of age, when he was under that age at the time of the offense and no proceeding had been commenced in the juvenile session of the county court prior to his becoming eighteen years of age.

The appellant is charged with stealing $100 from a service station on January 16, 1967. At that time appellant was approximately seventeen years and ten months old. On March 13, 1967, five days before he became eighteen years of age, he was indicted. On March 31, 1967, that indictment was dismissed. The matter was again referred to the grand jury. On June 24, 1967, appellant was reindicted, a second motion to dismiss was overruled, and he was tried and convicted.

The pertinent portion of the statute, KRS 208.020(1)(a), follows:

'(1) The juvenile session of the county court of each county shall have exclusive jurisdiction in proceedings concerning any child, living, or found, within the county and has not reached his eighteenth birthday:

(a) Who has committed a public offense, * * *.'

Appellant relies on cases decided under Carroll's Kentucky Statutes, Section 331e, 1915 Edition, later incorporated in KRS 199.020 and 199.080, the pertinent part of which provided:

'(2) The county court of the several counties of this State shall have exclusive jurisdiction in all cases coming within the terms and provisions of this act.'

In Mattingly v. Commonwealth, 171 Ky. 222, 188 S.W. 370, this provision was construed to mean that the juvenile court had exclusive jurisdiction over an adult who had committed an offense while still a minor.

In 1952 the juvenile court jurisdiction provision was changed to read as follows:

'Any person who is alleged to have violated or attempted to violate any federal or state law, or municipal ordinance, prior to having reached his eighteenth birthday shall, if proceedings concerning him are instituted prior to his twentieth birthday, be dealt with as provided in KRS 208.010 to 208.590 for a child.' Kentucky Acts, 1952, Chapter 161, Section 2.

This 'twentieth birthday' provision was repealed in 1956, and the statute was re-enacted substantially in its present form. Kentucky Acts, 1956, Chapter 157, Sections 22 and 23. It should be noted that prior to 1952, a juvenile court had exclusive jurisdiction over any person, regardless of age, who had committed an offense before reaching the age of eighteen years. By the change in the statute, the exclusive juvenile court jurisdiction was limited to 'proceedings * * * instituted prior to his twentieth birthday.' This limitation was later omitted.

The present statute, in effect, says that the juvenile court shall have exclusive jurisdiction in proceedings concerning any...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Koonce v. Com.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky
    • March 20, 1970
    ...on May 15, 1968, William became eighteen years of age on May 18, 1968, and he was indicted on May 29, 1968. We held in Lowry v. Com., Ky., 424 S.W.2d 841 (1968), that the circuit court had jurisdiction to try an accused on an indictment returned after he became eighteen years of age, even t......
  • Dubord v. Gmri, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Western District of Kentucky
    • March 29, 1999
    ...respect to criminal responsibility in particular, a person 18 and older may be prosecuted as an adult. KRS 610.010 and Lowry v. Commonwealth, 424 S.W.2d 841 (Ky.1968). Unlike some states, Kentucky does not have a Dram Shop Act. Nevertheless, under certain circumstances, Kentucky courts have......
  • Locke v. Com.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky
    • November 23, 1973
    ...and no valid transfer order had been entered transferring jurisdiction to the circuit court, he cites the cases of Lowry v. Commonwealth, Ky., 424 S.W.2d 841 (1968) and Koonce v. Commonwealth, Ky., 452 S.W.2d 822 (1970), and attempts to distinguish his case from these on the basis that proc......
  • Ferguson v. Com.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court — District of Kentucky
    • May 17, 1974
    ...may be prosecuted as an adult if he is 18 years of age when the criminal proceedings are instituted against him. See Lowry v. Commonwealth, Ky., 424 S.W.2d 841. He argues, however, that the police and the prosecuting authorities deliberately delayed the institution of proceedings against hi......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT