Samples v. Com., No. 97-SC-015-MR

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court (Kentucky)
Citation983 S.W.2d 151
Decision Date03 September 1998
PartiesLarry Dale SAMPLES, Appellant, v. COMMONWEALTH of Kentucky, Appellee.
Docket NumberNo. 97-SC-015-MR

Page 151

983 S.W.2d 151
Larry Dale SAMPLES, Appellant,
v.
COMMONWEALTH of Kentucky, Appellee.
No. 97-SC-015-MR.
Supreme Court of Kentucky.
Sept. 3, 1998.
As Modified on Denial of Rehearing Dec. 17, 1998.

Page 152

Daniel T. Goyette, Jefferson District Public Defender, Bruce P. Hackett, Frank Wm. Heft, Jr., Deputy Appellate Defender of the Jefferson District Public Defender, Louisville, KY, for appellant.

A.B. Chandler III, Attorney General, Samuel J. Floyd, Jr., Assistant Attorney General, Criminal Appellate Division, Office of the Attorney General, Frankfort, KY, for appellee.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Appellant was indicted for numerous sex crimes, all allegedly committed against his three step-children, C.D., M.N., and W.N. He was convicted in the Jefferson Circuit Court of sodomy in the first degree, sodomy in the second degree and sexual abuse in the first degree as to M.N. only. Appellant waived jury sentencing and was sentenced by the trial court to twenty-two years, ten years, and five years respectively, with all sentences to run concurrently. He appeals to this court as a matter of right. Ky. Const. § 110(2)(b).

Appellant's first claim of error pertains to the denial of his pretrial motion that he be provided with the addresses of all potential jurors in his case. Appellant noted that the addresses of all jurors summoned for jury duty had been "blacked out" on the juror qualification forms. The trial court denied the motion, stating on the record that the chief judge of the Jefferson Circuit Court, with the concurrence of the "general term" (a majority of the judges of the Jefferson Circuit Court), had decided to remove the addresses of those summoned for jury duty from the juror qualification forms and that this procedure had been approved by the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. He further explained that this action had resulted from the objections of some jurors to furnishing their addresses to criminal defendants. The chief judge's decision, though apparently documented, was not memorialized by the adoption of a local rule or the entry of a formal order of record. The trial judge expressed his personal disagreement with the decision, but nevertheless denied the motion.

KRS 29A.070(7) provides:

The contents of juror qualification forms shall be made available to parties or their attorneys of record unless the court determines in any instance in the interest of justice that this information shall be kept confidential or its use limited in whole or in part. (Emphasis added.)

Appellant interprets this provision to vest in the trial judge the discretion whether to keep portions of the juror qualification forms confidential. He points out that the trial judge is not bound by administrative orders of the chief circuit judge which interfere with his discretionary powers. Cf. Brutley v. Commonwealth, Ky., 967 S.W.2d 20 (1998). However, Part II, § 7(7) of the Administrative Procedures of the Court of Justice (Ad.Proc.) provides as follows:

The contents of juror qualification forms shall be made available to the trial judge and to parties or their attorneys of record unless the chief circuit judge or designee determines in any instance in the interest of justice that the information shall be kept confidential or its use limited in whole or in part. (Emphasis added.)

Matters pertaining to jury selection and management are more inherently within

Page 153

the authority of the courts than the legislature, and any conflict between a rule and a statute must be resolved by following the rule rather than the statute. Williams v. Commonwealth, Ky.App., 734 S.W.2d 810, 812 (1987); Trent v. Commonwealth, Ky.App., 606 S.W.2d 386 (1980). Regardless, we do not perceive any conflict between KRS 29A.070(7) and Ad.Proc. Part II § 7(7). The statute vests the discretion in the "court" and the rule clarifies that the "court" is the chief circuit judge or designee. The trial judge properly deferred to the authority of the chief circuit judge to redact the addresses of prospective jurors from the juror qualification forms.

Along the same lines, appellant argues that the chief circuit judge's order interferes with the trial judge's discretion to control the voir dire examination of jurors. RCr 9.38; Woodford v. Commonwealth, Ky., 376 S.W.2d 526, 527 (1964). The juror qualification form is a questionnaire filled out and submitted by all persons summoned for jury duty. Voir dire is the oral...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 practice notes
  • Parson v. Com., No. 2002-SC-0103-MR.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (Kentucky)
    • 17 June 2004
    ...Commonwealth, Ky., 54 S.W.3d 147, 151 (2001); Cornelison v. Commonwealth, Ky., 990 S.W.2d 609, 610 (1999); Samples v. Commonwealth, Ky., 983 S.W.2d 151, 152-53 (1998), overruled on other grounds by Lawson v. Commonwealth, Ky., 53 S.W.3d 534, 544 (2001). Accordingly, instead of copying the l......
  • Parson v. Commonwealth, No. 2002-SC-0103-MR (KY 6/21/2004), No. 2002-SC-0103-MR.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (Kentucky)
    • 21 June 2004
    ...Commonwealth, Ky., 54 S.W.3d 147,151 (2001); Cornelison v. Commonwealth, Ky., 990 S.W.2d 609, 610 (1999); Samples v. Commonwealth, Ky., 983 S.W.2d 151, 152-53 (1998), overruled on other grounds by Lawson v. Commonwealth, Ky., 53 S.W.3d 534, 544 (2001). Accordingly, instead of copying the la......
  • Springer v. Commonwealth, 96-SC-502-MR
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (Kentucky)
    • 22 April 1999
    ...of permissible penalties, including those for lesser included offenses, was from one day to life in prison. Samples v. Commonwealth, KY., 983 S.W.2d 151, 153-54 (1998).[112] In the case at bar, the jurors received instructions authorizing them to find Springer guilty of murder or of one of ......
  • Brown v. Com., No. 2006-SC-000654-MR.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (Kentucky)
    • 17 June 2010
    ..."the party introducing him may introduce evidence to corroborate his testimony or support his credibility." Samples v. Commonwealth, 983 S.W.2d 151, 154 (Ky.1998) (citations and internal quotation marks Whether under this general rule merely asking the witness if he or she has been truthful......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
13 cases
  • Parson v. Com., No. 2002-SC-0103-MR.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (Kentucky)
    • 17 June 2004
    ...Commonwealth, Ky., 54 S.W.3d 147, 151 (2001); Cornelison v. Commonwealth, Ky., 990 S.W.2d 609, 610 (1999); Samples v. Commonwealth, Ky., 983 S.W.2d 151, 152-53 (1998), overruled on other grounds by Lawson v. Commonwealth, Ky., 53 S.W.3d 534, 544 (2001). Accordingly, instead of copying the l......
  • Parson v. Commonwealth, No. 2002-SC-0103-MR (KY 6/21/2004), No. 2002-SC-0103-MR.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (Kentucky)
    • 21 June 2004
    ...Commonwealth, Ky., 54 S.W.3d 147,151 (2001); Cornelison v. Commonwealth, Ky., 990 S.W.2d 609, 610 (1999); Samples v. Commonwealth, Ky., 983 S.W.2d 151, 152-53 (1998), overruled on other grounds by Lawson v. Commonwealth, Ky., 53 S.W.3d 534, 544 (2001). Accordingly, instead of copying the la......
  • Springer v. Commonwealth, 96-SC-502-MR
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (Kentucky)
    • 22 April 1999
    ...of permissible penalties, including those for lesser included offenses, was from one day to life in prison. Samples v. Commonwealth, KY., 983 S.W.2d 151, 153-54 (1998).[112] In the case at bar, the jurors received instructions authorizing them to find Springer guilty of murder or of one of ......
  • Brown v. Com., No. 2006-SC-000654-MR.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (Kentucky)
    • 17 June 2010
    ..."the party introducing him may introduce evidence to corroborate his testimony or support his credibility." Samples v. Commonwealth, 983 S.W.2d 151, 154 (Ky.1998) (citations and internal quotation marks Whether under this general rule merely asking the witness if he or she has been truthful......
  • 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