Catchline at repeal: Disposition of child convicted of felony or misdemeanor.
History: Repealed 1986 Ky. Acts ch. 423, sec. 198, effective July 1, 1987. --Amended
1976 Ky. Acts ch. 168, sec. 7, effective June 19, 1976. -- Amended 1962 Ky. Acts
ch. 212, sec. 5, effective June 16, 1962. -- Amended 1956 Ky. Acts ch. 157, sec. 27,
effective February 27, 1956. -- Amended 1954 Ky. Acts ch. 193, sec. 4, effective
June 17, 1954. -- Created 1952 Ky. Acts ch. 161, sec. 18, effective January 1, 1953.
Note: This section was repealed by 1980 Ky. Acts ch. 280, which was to have become
effective July 1, 1982. Thereafter, 1982 Ky. Acts ch. 284 changed the effective date
of that act to July 15, 1984. Then, 1984 Ky. Acts ch. 184 repealed both 1980 Ky.
Acts ch. 280, and 1982 Ky. Acts ch. 284.
Notes of Decisions
Pevlor v. Commonwealth, 638 S.W.2d 272 (Ky. 1982).
“Moreover, the Court heard and considered the testimony of three witnesses offered by defendant Pevlor in furtherance of his motion for probation or, in the alternative, for the Court to exercise its discretionary authority afforded the Court under KRS 208.180. No statements were…”
Vanhoose v. Commonwealth, 264 S.W.2d 72 (Ky. Ct. App. 1954).
“” KRS 208.180(1). . It is our conclusion, therefore, that jurisdiction of the appellant was not divested from the Circuit Court by the new law, but that the Circuit Judge merely was afforded greater discretionary power and a new facility in handling juveniles after conviction.”
Hensley v. Commonwealth, 280 S.W.2d 540 (Ky. Ct. App. 1955).
“re, custody and control of the Youth Authority, there t.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 208.180(1) — 2 cases
Vanhoose v. Commonwealth, 264 S.W.2d 72 (Ky. Ct. App. 1954).
“” KRS 208.180(1). . It is our conclusion, therefore, that jurisdiction of the appellant was not divested from the Circuit Court by the new law, but that the Circuit Judge merely was afforded greater discretionary power and a new facility in handling juveniles after conviction.”
Hensley v. Commonwealth, 280 S.W.2d 540 (Ky. Ct. App. 1955).
“re, custody and control of the Youth Authority, there t.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.