Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Commonwealth v. Goss

Kentucky Supreme Court

Decided April 17, 2014No. 2011-SC-000780-DGPublished

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partScott, J.

While I concur with the reinstatement of Goss’s conviction for identity theft relating to her daughter and the reversal of Goss’s conviction for identity theft relating to her ex-husband, I dissent from that portion of the majority’s opinion declining to remand to the trial court for Goss to be retried for identity theft related to her ex-husband on a theory of check fraud.

The majority concludes, and I agree, that Goss’s conviction of identity theft related to her ex-husband must be reversed due to her being charged, in part, under a theory of credit card fraud, which is not under the purview…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Bussell v. CommonwealthKentucky Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Commonwealth v. O'ConnerKentucky Supreme Court · 2012

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

Powered by the Exa API