16 Kentucky opinions name it 2 courts 1977–2026 7 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 |
|---|---|---|
MV Transportation, Inc. v. Allgeiergreen2 sentences2026RCr 9.22, the contemporaneous objection rule, requires counsel to “at the time the ruling or order of the court is made or sought, makes known to the court the action which that party desires the court to take or any objection to the action of the court, and on request of the court, the grounds therefor.” Preservation of an issue not raised in a detailed motion in limine requires 3 The trial court heard no testimony on the fourth day of trial because Miller’s final witness, Dr. Ebben was unavailable that day. 8 defense counsel to make a specific, contemporaneous objection because “the trial ju 2022We have repeatedly held that “while a motion in limine is a proper means for bringing evidentiary issues to the trial court’s attention, the contemporaneous objection rule was still alive and well.” Jenkins v. Commonwealth, 607 S.W.3d 601 , 611–12 (Ky. 2020) (citing Lanham v. Commonwealth, 171 S.W.3d 14 , 20–21 (Ky. 2005)). “[T]he critical point in 3 Although Crouch argues that this issue was preserved, he also seeks palpable error review if we find it unpreserved. 8 preservation of an issue remains: was the question fairly brought to the attention of the trial court.” Allgeier, 433 S.W.3d at | 3 | 4 |
Davis v. Commonwealthgreen2 sentences2022We have repeatedly held that “while a motion in limine is a proper means for bringing evidentiary issues to the trial court’s attention, the contemporaneous objection rule was still alive and well.” Jenkins v. Commonwealth, 607 S.W.3d 601 , 611–12 (Ky. 2020) (citing Lanham v. Commonwealth, 171 S.W.3d 14 , 20–21 (Ky. 2005)). “[T]he critical point in 3 Although Crouch argues that this issue was preserved, he also seeks palpable error review if we find it unpreserved. 8 preservation of an issue remains: was the question fairly brought to the attention of the trial court.” Allgeier, 433 S.W.3d at 2005Whether or not this objective has been achieved may well depend upon what the court meant when it said `we have not repealed the contemporaneous objection rule.'" (footnotes omitted)). [6] Davis v. Commonwealth, 147 S.W.3d 709, 722-23 (Ky.2004); Prater v. Cabinet for Human Resources, 954 S.W.2d 954, 959 (Ky.1997); O'Bryan v. Hedgespeth, 892 S.W.2d 571, 574-75 (Ky.1995) (emphasizing the part of the rule that a motion in limine is sufficient to preserve the error for appellate review and ruling that proceeding after the motion is overruled in a manner inconsistent with the position taken in the | 3 | 4 |
Clay v. Commonwealthgreen2 sentences2025Clay v. Commonwealth, 291 S.W.3d 210, 220 (Ky. 2008), as modified on denial of -6- reh’g (Aug. 27, 2009).6 Specifically, our Supreme Court held that “[p]erhaps there was not enough time to object before judicial notice was taken, but this fact does not affect the contemporaneous objection requirement . . . .” Id. 2025Clay v. Commonwealth, 291 S.W.3d 210, 220 (Ky. 2008), as modified on denial of -6- reh’g (Aug. 27, 2009).6 Specifically, our Supreme Court held that “[p]erhaps there was not enough time to object before judicial notice was taken, but this fact does not affect the contemporaneous objection requirement . . . .” Id. | 2 | 2 |
Ice v. Commonwealthgreen2 sentences1997See, e.g., Ice v. Commonwealth, Ky., 667 S.W.2d 671 , cert. denied, 469 U.S. 860 , 105 S.Ct. 192 , 83 L.Ed.2d 125 (1984). 1997See, e.g., Ice v. Commonwealth, Ky., 667 S.W.2d 671 , cert. denied, 469 U.S. 860 , 105 S.Ct. 192 , 83 L.Ed.2d 125 (1984). | 2 | 2 |
Anderson v. United Statesgreen2 sentences1997See, e.g., Ice v. Commonwealth, Ky., 667 S.W.2d 671 , cert. denied, 469 U.S. 860 , 105 S.Ct. 192 , 83 L.Ed.2d 125 (1984). 1997See, e.g., Ice v. Commonwealth, Ky., 667 S.W.2d 671 , cert. denied, 469 U.S. 860 , 105 S.Ct. 192 , 83 L.Ed.2d 125 (1984). | 2 | 2 |
Yang v. Californiagreen2 sentences1997See, e.g., Ice v. Commonwealth, Ky., 667 S.W.2d 671 , cert. denied, 469 U.S. 860 , 105 S.Ct. 192 , 83 L.Ed.2d 125 (1984). 1997See, e.g., Ice v. Commonwealth, Ky., 667 S.W.2d 671 , cert. denied, 469 U.S. 860 , 105 S.Ct. 192 , 83 L.Ed.2d 125 (1984). | 2 | 2 |
Noe v. Neavesgreen2 sentences1997See, e.g., Ice v. Commonwealth, Ky., 667 S.W.2d 671 , cert. denied, 469 U.S. 860 , 105 S.Ct. 192 , 83 L.Ed.2d 125 (1984). 1997See, e.g., Ice v. Commonwealth, Ky., 667 S.W.2d 671 , cert. denied, 469 U.S. 860 , 105 S.Ct. 192 , 83 L.Ed.2d 125 (1984). | 2 | 2 |
Olden v. Commonwealthgreen1 sentence2007See Olden v. Commonwealth, 203 S.W.3d 672, 675 (Ky.2006) (purpose of criminal analog of contemporaneous-objection rule). | 1 | 1 |
O'BRYAN v. Hedgespethgreen2 sentences2005Whether or not this objective has been achieved may well depend upon what the court meant when it said `we have not repealed the contemporaneous objection rule.'" (footnotes omitted)). [6] Davis v. Commonwealth, 147 S.W.3d 709, 722-23 (Ky.2004); Prater v. Cabinet for Human Resources, 954 S.W.2d 954, 959 (Ky.1997); O'Bryan v. Hedgespeth, 892 S.W.2d 571, 574-75 (Ky.1995) (emphasizing the part of the rule that a motion in limine is sufficient to preserve the error for appellate review and ruling that proceeding after the motion is overruled in a manner inconsistent with the position taken in the 2005Davis v. Commonwealth, 147 S.W.3d 709, 722-23 (Ky.2004); Prater v. Cabinet for Human Resources, 954 S.W.2d 954, 959 (Ky. 1997); O’Bryan v. Hedgespeth, 892 S.W.2d 571, 574-75 (Ky.1995) (emphasizing the part of the rule that a motion in limine is sufficient to preserve the error for appellate review and ruling that proceeding after the motion is overruled in a manner inconsistent with the position taken in the motion still preserves the error for review because "[t] o construe a motion in limine as waived in present circumstances would defeat the purpose of KRE 103(d) and destroy the value of ha | 1 | 1 |
Prater v. Cabinet for Human Resourcesgreen2 sentences2005Whether or not this objective has been achieved may well depend upon what the court meant when it said `we have not repealed the contemporaneous objection rule.'" (footnotes omitted)). [6] Davis v. Commonwealth, 147 S.W.3d 709, 722-23 (Ky.2004); Prater v. Cabinet for Human Resources, 954 S.W.2d 954, 959 (Ky.1997); O'Bryan v. Hedgespeth, 892 S.W.2d 571, 574-75 (Ky.1995) (emphasizing the part of the rule that a motion in limine is sufficient to preserve the error for appellate review and ruling that proceeding after the motion is overruled in a manner inconsistent with the position taken in the 2005Davis v. Commonwealth, 147 S.W.3d 709, 722-23 (Ky.2004); Prater v. Cabinet for Human Resources, 954 S.W.2d 954, 959 (Ky. 1997); O’Bryan v. Hedgespeth, 892 S.W.2d 571, 574-75 (Ky.1995) (emphasizing the part of the rule that a motion in limine is sufficient to preserve the error for appellate review and ruling that proceeding after the motion is overruled in a manner inconsistent with the position taken in the motion still preserves the error for review because "[t] o construe a motion in limine as waived in present circumstances would defeat the purpose of KRE 103(d) and destroy the value of ha | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Kentucky. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Lanham v. Commonwealth
green
2 sentences2024In Lanham v. Commonwealth, 171 S.W.3d 14 (Ky. 2005), we held that while a motion in limine is a proper means for bringing evidentiary issues to the trial court’s attention, the contemporaneous objection rule was still alive and well. 2024In Lanham v. Commonwealth, 171 S.W.3d 14 (Ky. 2005), we held that while a motion in limine is a proper means for bringing evidentiary issues to the trial court’s attention, the contemporaneous objection rule was still alive and well. | 6 | 2014–2024 |
Cash v. Commonwealth
green
1 sentence2021Notwithstanding the contemporaneous objection rule embodied in RCr 9.22, this Court can consider a “palpable error” which affects the “substantial rights” of a defendant even though the error was insufficiently raised or preserved before the trial court.9 Id. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Edwards v. Commonwealth
green
2 sentences1984As stated in Edwards v. Commonwealth, 298 Ky. 366 , 182 S.W.2d 948 (1944), at p. 374, 182 S.W.2d 948 : “(W)here the defendant’s life is at stake, technical rules of procedure must give way to the more lofty aim that justice may be done.” KRS 532.075, the statute regarding review of sentence by the Supreme Court in death penalty cases, adopts and incorporates these decisions in subsection 2, where it states: “The Supreme Court shall consider ... any errors enumerated by way of appeal.” In these circumstances, the question of whether objection was made at the trial level is only significant wher 1984As stated in Edwards v. Commonwealth, 298 Ky. 366 , 182 S.W.2d 948 (1944), at p. 374, 182 S.W.2d 948 : “(W)here the defendant’s life is at stake, technical rules of procedure must give way to the more lofty aim that justice may be done.” KRS 532.075, the statute regarding review of sentence by the Supreme Court in death penalty cases, adopts and incorporates these decisions in subsection 2, where it states: “The Supreme Court shall consider ... any errors enumerated by way of appeal.” In these circumstances, the question of whether objection was made at the trial level is only significant wher | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Stone v. Commonwealth
green
2 sentences1977CR 61.02 (as made applicable to criminal proceedings by RCr 13.04); Stone v. Commonwealth, Ky., 456 S.W.2d 43 (1970). 1977CR 61.02 (as made applicable to criminal proceedings by RCr 13.04); Stone v. Commonwealth, Ky., 456 S.W.2d 43 (1970). | 1 | 1977–1977 |
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.