Legal Opinion · Dissent

Kirkland v. Commonwealth

Kentucky Supreme Court

Decided September 27, 2001No. 1998-SC-0934-MR, 1998-SC-0935-MRPublished

1DissentStumbo, Justice

Respectfully, I must dissent from Section III of the Court’s opinion. The majority states that a robbery was accomplished solely by “McKee and Kirkland entering] the store with a gun in order to steal money from the victim,” and, as such, holds that the trial court was correct in refusing a criminal attempt instruction with respect to McKee. Since a robbery was committed, says the majority, there is no evidence of attempt. I believe this logic is flawed, and the trial court should have allowed an instruction for McKee. As we stated in Taylor v. Commonwealth, Ky., 995 S.W.2d 355 (1999):

In a…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Taylor v. CommonwealthKentucky Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Wade v. CommonwealthKentucky Supreme Court · 1986

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

Powered by the Exa API