Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
32 Kentucky opinions name it 2 courts 1984–2026 17 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Kentucky courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Jonathan Sexton v. Commonwealth of Kentuckygreen2 sentences2024See Sexton v. Commonwealth, 647 S.W.3d 227 , 232 (Ky. 2022) (holding that “reversal is not the universal, essential result of a unanimous verdict error. 2024And in Sexton v. Commonwealth, the Kentucky Supreme Court indicated that “reversal is not the universal, essential result of a unanimous verdict error.” 647 S.W.3d 227 , 232 (Ky. 2022). | 4 | 7 |
Johnson v. Commonwealthgreen2 sentences2023As Justice Cunningham stated in his dissent in part in Johnson v. Commonwealth, the Majority of this Court is “requiring juries to be unanimous on matters that the unanimous verdict requirement never anticipated.” 405 S.W.3d at 461 (Cunningham, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part). 2021As Justice Cunningham stated in his dissent in Johnson v. Commonwealth, “[w]e are requiring juries to be unanimous on matters that the unanimous verdict requirement never anticipated.” 405 S.W.3d 439, 461 (Ky. 2013) (Cunningham, J., dissenting). | 4 | 6 |
Travis v. Commonwealthgreen2 sentences2013We have previously determined that when either of the theories contained in a combination instruction lacks evidentiary support, there is a unanimous verdict violation if “there is a reasonable possibility that some member or members of the jury actually relied on the erroneously included theory.” Malone v. Commonwealth, 364 S.W.3d 121, 130-31 (Ky.2012). “[I]f there is no reasonable possibility that the jury actually relied on the erroneous theory!,] ... then there is no unanimity problem.” Travis, 327 S.W.3d at 463 (“Though such a case presents an error in the instructions, namely, the inclus 2012Travis v. Commonwealth, 327 S.W.3d 456 (Ky.2010) In Hayes v. Commonwealth, 625 S.W.2d 583 (Ky.1981), for example, we held that an alternative murder instruction violated the unanimous verdict requirement because the only evidence of the defendant’s state of mind came from his confession, which indicated an intentional rather than a wanton killing. | 2 | 4 |
Brown v. Commonwealthgreen2 sentences2024Id. “[W]hether a unanimous verdict violation stems from a ‘combination jury instruction’ first depends on whether a particular kind of fact constitutes a ‘factual element[] … listed in the statute that defines the crime.[’]” Brown, 553 S.W.3d at 840 (quoting Richardson v. United States, 526 U.S. 813, 817 , 119 S.Ct. 1707, 1710 (1999)). 2024Id. “[W]hether a unanimous verdict violation stems from a ‘combination jury instruction’ first depends on whether a particular kind of fact constitutes a ‘factual element[] … listed in the statute that defines the crime.[’]” Brown, 553 S.W.3d at 840 (quoting Richardson v. United States, 526 U.S. 813, 817 , 119 S.Ct. 1707, 1710 (1999)). | 2 | 3 |
Miller v. Commonwealthgreen2 sentences2021Miller v. Commonwealth, 283 S.W.3d 690, 696 (Ky. 2009). 2020Miller v. Commonwealth, 283 S.W.3d 690, 695-96 (Ky. -11- 2009). | 2 | 3 |
Mark Johnson v. Commonwealth of Kentuckygreen2 sentences2024Id. at 457. 2023Id. at 457. | 2 | 2 |
Wells v. Commonwealthgreen2 sentences2020KRS 29A.280(3); Wells v. Commonwealth, Ky., 561 S.W.2d 85 (1978). 2016See also Wells v. Commonwealth, 561 S.W.2d 85, 87 (Ky. 1978). 5 See Apodaca v. Oregon, 406 U.S. 404 (1972) (the federal Constitution only requires a majority verdict to sustain a conviction). 6 405 S.W.3d 439, 454 (Ky. 2013). 7 Id. 4 when a single jury instruction may be satisfied by multiple criminal acts by the defendan.t. 8 This Court has taken a strong position on the unanimity requirement, and we see no reason to depart from that in this case. | 1 | 2 |
Richardson v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2024Id. “[W]hether a unanimous verdict violation stems from a ‘combination jury instruction’ first depends on whether a particular kind of fact constitutes a ‘factual element[] … listed in the statute that defines the crime.[’]” Brown, 553 S.W.3d at 840 (quoting Richardson v. United States, 526 U.S. 813, 817 , 119 S.Ct. 1707, 1710 (1999)). 2024Id. “[W]hether a unanimous verdict violation stems from a ‘combination jury instruction’ first depends on whether a particular kind of fact constitutes a ‘factual element[] … listed in the statute that defines the crime.[’]” Brown, 553 S.W.3d at 840 (quoting Richardson v. United States, 526 U.S. 813, 817 , 119 S.Ct. 1707, 1710 (1999)). | 1 | 1 |
Christopher Gribbins v. Commonwealth of Kentuckygreen1 sentence2023Gribbins v. Commonwealth, 483 S.W.3d 370, 376 (Ky. 2016). | 1 | 1 |
Davis v. Commonwealthgreen1 sentence2020It cites to Davis v. Commonwealth, 967 S.W.2d 574, 582 (Ky. 1998), in support of this argument, in which the Supreme Court addressed the unanimous verdict requirement in criminal prosecutions: Nothing less than a unanimous verdict is permitted in a criminal case. | 1 | 1 |
King v. Commonwealthred2 sentences2019Id. at 352 . 2019This Court recently revisited the unanimous verdict issue in King v. Commonwealth, 554 S.W.3d 343, 350-51 (Ky. 2018), again holding that “when a trial court fails to adequately distinguish one instruction from another, ... a unanimous-verdict violation arises.” King similarly included multiple counts of sexual abuse and, despite ample evidence that King committed the crimes, it could not be determined, based on the instructions, that all jurors agreed upon the criminal acts for which King was convicted. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Cagnogreen1 sentence2019Ct. App. 2012) (“[J]ury unanimity is required only as to the verdict, not to any particular theory of guilt.”). 21 be unanimous on matters that the unanimous verdict requirement never anticipated.” Id. at 461. | 1 | 1 |
Apodaca v. Oregonred1 sentence2016See also Wells v. Commonwealth, 561 S.W.2d 85, 87 (Ky. 1978). 5 See Apodaca v. Oregon, 406 U.S. 404 (1972) (the federal Constitution only requires a majority verdict to sustain a conviction). 6 405 S.W.3d 439, 454 (Ky. 2013). 7 Id. 4 when a single jury instruction may be satisfied by multiple criminal acts by the defendan.t. 8 This Court has taken a strong position on the unanimity requirement, and we see no reason to depart from that in this case. | 1 | 1 |
Kingrey v. Commonwealthgreen2 sentences2016Likewise, in Martin v. Commonwealth, we held that a unanimous-verdict violation occurs 3 See Kingery v. Commonwealth, 396 S.W.3d 824, 831-32 (Ky. 2013). 4 See id. 2016Likewise, in Martin v. Commonwealth, we held that a unanimous-verdict violation occurs 3 See Kingery v. Commonwealth, 396 S.W.3d 824, 831-32 (Ky. 2013). 4 See id. | 1 | 1 |
Malone v. Commonwealthgreen1 sentence2013We have previously determined that when either of the theories contained in a combination instruction lacks evidentiary support, there is a unanimous verdict violation if “there is a reasonable possibility that some member or members of the jury actually relied on the erroneously included theory.” Malone v. Commonwealth, 364 S.W.3d 121, 130-31 (Ky.2012). “[I]f there is no reasonable possibility that the jury actually relied on the erroneous theory!,] ... then there is no unanimity problem.” Travis, 327 S.W.3d at 463 (“Though such a case presents an error in the instructions, namely, the inclus | 1 | 1 |
Bowling v. Commonwealthgreen1 sentence2008It did not instruct the jury that its finding must be unanimous or that it must reach a verdict on mitigating circumstances.”); Haight v. Commonwealth, 938 S.W.2d 243, 249 (Ky.1996) (denying a similar unanimous verdict claim); Bowling v. Commonwealth, 873 S.W.2d 175, 180 (Ky.1993) (specifically distinguishing instructions like those used in Kentucky from Mills v. Maryland). | 1 | 1 |
Haight v. Commonwealthgreen1 sentence2008It did not instruct the jury that its finding must be unanimous or that it must reach a verdict on mitigating circumstances.”); Haight v. Commonwealth, 938 S.W.2d 243, 249 (Ky.1996) (denying a similar unanimous verdict claim); Bowling v. Commonwealth, 873 S.W.2d 175, 180 (Ky.1993) (specifically distinguishing instructions like those used in Kentucky from Mills v. Maryland). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kentucky. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Hayes v. Commonwealth
green
2 sentences2012Travis v. Commonwealth, 327 S.W.3d 456 (Ky.2010) In Hayes v. Commonwealth, 625 S.W.2d 583 (Ky.1981), for example, we held that an alternative murder instruction violated the unanimous verdict requirement because the only evidence of the defendant’s state of mind came from his confession, which indicated an intentional rather than a wanton killing. 2012Travis v. Commonwealth, 327 S.W.3d 456 (Ky.2010) In Hayes v. Commonwealth, 625 S.W.2d 583 (Ky.1981), for example, we held that an alternative murder instruction violated the unanimous verdict requirement because the only evidence of the defendant’s state of mind came from his confession, which indicated an intentional rather than a wanton killing. | 2 | 1984–2012 |
Jose Sanchez v. Commonwealth of Kentucky
green
1 sentence2026This brings Holt’s argument “firmly within the ambit of Sanchez, which held ‘[b]y expressly agreeing to the jury instructions . . . [defendant] waived his ability to now challenge those instructions on appeal.” Id. at 659-60 (quoting Sanchez v. Commonwealth, 680 S.W.3d 911 , 930 (Ky. 2023)).4 Accordingly, Holt’s allegation of error concerning the unanimity issue in the jury instructions is barred from appellate review as she informed the trial court she had no objections to the jury instructions nor any desire to change the proposed 4 In Sanchez, our Kentucky Supreme Court found that the defen | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Cox v. Commonwealth
green
1 sentence2024It then noted the question of whether a unanimous verdict violation occurs “depends on whether a particular kind of fact constitutes a ‘factual element[] . . . listed in the statute that defines the crime.’” Id. at 813 . | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Robinson v. Commonwealth
green
2 sentences2024The Robinson Court explained that “[w]hen a jury is presented, in a single instruction, alternate theories of guilt for the same offense, ‘each juror’s 4 The version of the manufacturing methamphetamine statute in effect at the time of the Robinson decision was virtually identical to the current version, except that in Robinson, the second method of manufacturing methamphetamine simply required possession of “chemicals or equipment for the manufacture of methamphetamine” with intent to manufacture, rather than requiring possession of “two (2) or more chemicals or two (2) or more items of equip 2024Robinson was convicted of manufacturing methamphetamine, among other crimes, and argued on appeal that he was denied a unanimous verdict because the instruction contained two theories of guilt. 4 Id. at 36 . | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Burnett v. Commonwealth
red
1 sentence2024The Robinson Court explained that “[w]hen a jury is presented, in a single instruction, alternate theories of guilt for the same offense, ‘each juror’s 4 The version of the manufacturing methamphetamine statute in effect at the time of the Robinson decision was virtually identical to the current version, except that in Robinson, the second method of manufacturing methamphetamine simply required possession of “chemicals or equipment for the manufacture of methamphetamine” with intent to manufacture, rather than requiring possession of “two (2) or more chemicals or two (2) or more items of equip | 1 | 2024–2024 |
David Wayne Dooley v. Commonwealth of Kentucky
green
2 sentences2023The absence of Sanchez’s tendered jury instructions leaves this Court unable to say whether 89 Id. at 502 . 90 Id. at 503 . 31 his tendered instructions contained the same alleged errors he now argues require reversal.91 In addition, during the parties’ discussion of the jury instructions with the trial court they agreed to separate each of the first-degree sexual abuse counts into two separate instructions—one based on forcible compulsion and one based on Sanchez’s and Jane’s respective ages—to avoid a unanimous verdict violation. 2023The absence of Sanchez’s tendered jury instructions leaves this Court unable to say whether 89 Id. at 502 . 90 Id. at 503 . 31 his tendered instructions contained the same alleged errors he now argues require reversal.91 In addition, during the parties’ discussion of the jury instructions with the trial court they agreed to separate each of the first-degree sexual abuse counts into two separate instructions—one based on forcible compulsion and one based on Sanchez’s and Jane’s respective ages—to avoid a unanimous verdict violation. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Benjamin v. Commonwealth
green
1 sentence2022Benjamin v. Commonwealth, 266 S.W.3d 775 (Ky. 2008). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Foster v. Commonwealth
green
1 sentence2012In Foster v. Commonwealth, 827 S.W.2d 670 (Ky.1991), we upheld the denial of instructions on unintentional homicide because the manner of killing — the victims were shot at close range, were repeatedly stabbed, were run over by an automobile, and were burned — permitted no inference but an intent to kill. | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Houston v. Commonwealth
green
1 sentence2012Malone is correct, of course, that instructions not supported by the evidence should not be given, Houston v. Commonwealth, 975 S.W.2d 925 (Ky.1998), and that a combination instruction, such as the murder instruction here, violates the unanimous verdict requirement if either theory of the crime lacks evidentiary support and there is a reasonable possibility that some member or members of the jury actually relied on the erroneously included *131 theory. | 1 | 2012–2012 |
United States v. Cotton
green
2 sentences2010The immediate question before us, however, is whether, where the error is unpreserved, overly broad instructions result in palpable error. *466 In Martin, supra , this Court went beyond the language of Kentucky Rule of Criminal Procedure (RCr) 10.26 to amplify the palpable error standard with language drawn from the federal cases, particularly United States v. Cotton, 535 U.S. 625 , 122 S.Ct. 1781 , 152 L.Ed.2d 860 (2002), a case in which the United States Supreme Court found no plain error where the indictment failed to set forth a necessary element of the offense, i.e., the quantity of drugs 2010The immediate question before us, however, is whether, where the error is unpreserved, overly broad instructions result in palpable error. *466 In Martin, supra , this Court went beyond the language of Kentucky Rule of Criminal Procedure (RCr) 10.26 to amplify the palpable error standard with language drawn from the federal cases, particularly United States v. Cotton, 535 U.S. 625 , 122 S.Ct. 1781 , 152 L.Ed.2d 860 (2002), a case in which the United States Supreme Court found no plain error where the indictment failed to set forth a necessary element of the offense, i.e., the quantity of drugs | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Martin v. Commonwealth
green
1 sentence2010The immediate question before us, however, is whether, where the error is unpreserved, overly broad instructions result in palpable error. *466 In Martin, supra , this Court went beyond the language of Kentucky Rule of Criminal Procedure (RCr) 10.26 to amplify the palpable error standard with language drawn from the federal cases, particularly United States v. Cotton, 535 U.S. 625 , 122 S.Ct. 1781 , 152 L.Ed.2d 860 (2002), a case in which the United States Supreme Court found no plain error where the indictment failed to set forth a necessary element of the offense, i.e., the quantity of drugs | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Brock v. Commonwealth
green
2 sentences2009Id. 2009Id. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.