Loving v. Commonwealth
Court of Appeals of Kentucky
Case 95 — INDICTMENT APPEAL PROM WARREN CIRCUIT COURT. 1. The court erred in the formation of the jury. (Crim. Code, secs. 190,. 191, 192.) 2. Erred in instructions to the jury. 3. The court certainly erred in permitting the cross-examination of Taylor and Jackson. (Crim.
Read the full summary
Case 95 — INDICTMENT APPEAL PROM WARREN CIRCUIT COURT. 1. The court erred in the formation of the jury. (Crim. Code, secs. 190,. 191, 192.) 2. Erred in instructions to the jury. 3. The court certainly erred in permitting the cross-examination of Taylor and Jackson. (Crim. Code, secs. 281,199; Brady vs. Commonwealth, 11 Bush, 351; Kennedy v. Ib., 14 Ib., 354.) 1. The court will see that Taylor was proven to he of bad character, and' not worthy of belief. 2. The .testimony of Jackson amounts to nothing. Neither should be-shielded from contradiction by a convenient want of memory. 3. There is no…
1Opinion of the Court
'CHIEF JUSTICE HARGIS
delivered the opinion op the court.
On the afternoon of the 22d of February, 1881, John Loving, a single man, thirty-one years old, living about three miles from Bowling Green, in which his mother resided, came into that town without any “especial business.”
After being about the town in different public places, and drinking two glasses of beer, near midnight he stopped in at Johnson’s saloon, where he found a man by the name of Hines and the bar-keeper Grubbs. They soon engaged in throwing dice for beer, and he there drank two glasses of beer.
Hines settled for what he lost…
2Cited by22 opinions
- Jett v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1969
- Pedigo v. CommonwealthCourt of Appeals of Kentucky · 1898
- Myers v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1901
- Harlan Public Service Co. v. Eastern Construction Co.Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976) · 1934
- Arine v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1926
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.