Legal Opinion · Dissent

Peterson v. Shake

Kentucky Supreme Court

Decided September 18, 2003No. 2002-SC-0695-MRPublished

1DissentKeller, Justice

I respectfully dissent. If the procedural prerequisites1 for a writ are satisfied, “whether to grant or deny a petition for a writ is within the appellate court’s discretion.” 2 However, unless the petition alleges a double jeopardy bar,3 a court may grant extraordinary relief only when the party seeking the writ satisfies the threshold requirements for such relief.4 Thus, “[djiscretion is not properly exercised when the appropriate remedy is to appeal.” 5 In the case at bar, if Appellant is convicted of the felony offense, he will be able to litigate his KRS 17.510 claim in an appeal from…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. St. Clair v. RoarkKentucky Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Commonwealth v. DeloneyKentucky Supreme Court · 2000
  3. Ohio River Contract Co. v. GordonCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1916
  4. Flynt v. CommonwealthKentucky Supreme Court · 2003
  5. Tipton v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1989

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API