At trial, the lead detective also testified about the nature of Oxycontin. The SC noted that such testimony has little relevance as to whether Defendant sold the drug or not. However, the SC noted that it did not think that such testimony fell under "matters of specialized scientific knowledge" under KRE 702.

SC also held that detective’s comments that they had "identified several targets and had purchased narcotics from them" as a basis for using an undercover agent in this case was not improper investigative hearsay or improper KRE 404(b) evidence. In large part, SC held Defendant did not properly preserve this objection at trial.

Dean was convicted of first-degree sodomy and other sex offenses involving two child-victims.  His convictions and underlying sentence of 20 years were upheld.  The primary issues on appeal were: (1) whether Dean's reaction to a statement made in his presence could be used as an admission by silence; and (2) whether Dean's failure to notify family services when one of the child victims lived in his home for an extended period of time could be used as an admission by conduct.  On the first issue, the statement was improperly admitted because there was no evidence of manifestation of adoption or belief in the truth of statement.  Perdue v. Commonwealth, 916 S.W.2d 148 (Ky. 1995).  On the second issue, the "conduct" of Dean's residing with the child victim was not a reaction to an earlier statement made in his presence.  Therefore, the statement preceding the conduct was improperly admitted as an admission.  Nonetheless, because there was no substantial possibility that the outcome would have been different in the absence of the errors, they were considered harmless.   

Downing was convicted of attempted rape, kidnapping, and first-degree sexual abuse and was sentenced to 40 years.  The primary issues on appeal were: (1) whether the TC abused its discretion in admitting evidence that the victim's family was poor and that Downing had made conflicting remarks about his sexual activity with his wife; (2) whether a directed verdict should have been granted on the kidnapping and attempted rape charges; and (3) whether the TC properly denied Downing's request for instructions on unlawful imprisonment.  On the first issue, SC held that such evidence was properly admitted under the circumstances because it was relevant to explain the victim's behavior and to help the jury assess the defendant's credibility.  On the second issue, the TC properly denied the DV motions because sufficient evidence existed to support the convictions.  And finally, there was no evidence with which to justify an instruction on unlawful imprisonment.  Affirmed.  

Edwards was convicted of first-degree sodomy (two counts) and first-degree sexual abuse (two counts).  On appeal, SC rejected his argument that there was insufficient evidence to support his convictions. Affirmed.  

Hooten's request for a writ of prohibition stemming from her transfer to circuit court under KRS 640.010 was denied because there was an adequate remedy by appeal.  

Isaacs was convicted of wanton murder, first-degree robbery, and tampering with physical evidence and was sentenced to life in prison.  On appeal, SC rejected his argument that the TC improperly denied his motion for a directed verdict on the wanton murder charge.  Affirmed.

The lead detective testified and defense counsel tried to cross-examine the detective about the unrelated prior event involving the death of Defendant’s daughter. TC denied this line of cross-examination. SC held that trial judge had wide discretion in limiting cross-examination. SC held that the proposed cross-examination was factual inquiry into the daughter’s death and was not intended to impeach, show bias against the defendant etc. Defense wanted to show that Defendant was not a suspect in daughter’s death. SC held that TC did not abuse its discretion regarding cross-examination.

Defendant was given not jail time credit at sentencing because he was serving a federal sentence. Defendant did not object until 3 years later. SC held that issue should have been raised at sentencing and thus was not preserved.

Defendant objected to jury instructions. Defense counsel participated in jury instruction process and since he made no objections, such arguments on appeal are waived.

Defendant claimed on appeal the KY did not either show that he actually manufactured methamphetamine or had that he had dominion and control over the items found in the case that could be used to manufacture meth. SC ruled there was sufficient evidence since Defendant was found hiding near where the police found the meth items and Defendant told police he had been present when methamphetamine was made at the location. Further, methamphetamine related items and methamphetamine were found in Defendant’s car.