Kentucky Revised Statutes

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 21.140 (2026)

Repealed, 1976

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KY-LRCapps.legislature.ky.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Catchline at repeal: Appeals in criminal cases. History: Repealed 1976 Ky. Acts ch. 67, sec. 14, effective March 23, 1976. -- Amended 1974 Ky. Acts ch. 406, sec. 297. -- Amended 1964 Ky. Acts ch. 72, sec. 1. -- Created 1962 Ky. Acts ch. 234, sec. 1.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 31 cases, 1963–2006 · leading case: Commonwealth v. Bailey, 71 S.W.3d 73 (Ky. 2002).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Commonwealth v. Bailey, 71 S.W.3d 73 (Ky. 2002). · cites it 34× “020(4)'s immediate statutory predecessor, KRS 21.140, was originally enacted in 1962 upon the repeal of the Code of Practice in Criminal Cases.”

Moore v. Commonwealth, 199 S.W.3d 132 (Ky. 2006). · cites it 4× “) This statute was previously compiled at KRS 21.140(1) and, before that, codified at Section 334 of the Criminal Code of Practice.”

Allen v. Walter, 534 S.W.2d 453 (Ky. 1976). · cites it 3× “140, one of which reads as follows: “(4) When an appeal is taken pursuant to subsection (3), the Court of Appeals, if the record so warrants, may reverse the decision of the circuit court and order a new trial in any case in which a new trial would not constitute double jeopardy…”

Commonwealth v. Lewis, 548 S.W.2d 509 (Ky. 1977). · cites it 3× “* Whether KRS 21.140(3) as it existed before amendment by the 1974 General Assembly governs the Commonwealth’s right of appeal in this case is immaterial.”

Commonwealth v. Devine, 396 S.W.2d 60 (Ky. Ct. App. 1965). · cites it 3× “KRS 21.140(3). Devine has failed to respond.”

Commonwealth v. Sebastian, 500 S.W.2d 417 (Ky. Ct. App. 1973). · cites it 2× “" Thereupon the Commonwealth perfected an appeal for a certification of the law pursuant to KRS 21.140(3). Two issues are involved, namely, (1) whether a wife's grant of permission to search a house jointly possessed by her and her husband, when the husband was absent, precluded…”

Commonwealth v. Allen, 441 S.W.2d 424 (Ky. Ct. App. 1969). · cites it 2× “Appellant argues that (1) this is a proper case for a certification of the law as authorized in KRS 21.140(3); ( (2) Barnes was not an accomplice, so it was unnecessary that his evidence be corroborated; (3) the securities sold were not exempt under the statute; and (4) the…”

Blankenship v. Commonwealth, 554 S.W.2d 898 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977). “Commonwealth, Ky., 368 S.W.2d 331 at 335 (1963).”

Lay v. Commonwealth, 506 S.W.2d 507 (Ky. Ct. App. 1974). “He simply did nothing. The right of appellate review in criminal cases is not granted as a matter of right under the Constitution but where a statute such as KRS 21.”

Commonwealth v. Allen, 404 S.W.2d 464 (Ky. Ct. App. 1966). “Certification of the law is sought pursuant to KRS 21.140 (3). The language of Count One of the indictment is: “That during the year 1964, in Jefferson County, Kentucky, the above named defendant conducted, managed, or promoted the business of Gem Distributing Company, a lottery…”

Polsgrove v. Commonwealth, 439 S.W.2d 776 (Ky. Ct. App. 1969). “The difficulty with this contention is that at the trial level Polsgrove was represented by employed counsel of his own choice.”

Johns v. Commonwealth, 394 S.W.2d 890 (Ky. Ct. App. 1965). “KRS 21.140(2). The question presented is whether the search of appellant’s automobile was legally accomplished.”

Show all 31 citing cases →

— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 21.140(1) — 5 cases

Moore v. Commonwealth, 199 S.W.3d 132 (Ky. 2006). “) This statute was previously compiled at KRS 21.140(1) and, before that, codified at Section 334 of the Criminal Code of Practice.”

Blankenship v. Commonwealth, 554 S.W.2d 898 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977). “Commonwealth, Ky., 368 S.W.2d 331 at 335 (1963).”

Smith v. Commonwealth, 424 S.W.2d 835 (Ky. Ct. App. 1967).

King v. Commonwealth, 471 S.W.2d 297 (Ky. Ct. App. 1971).

— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 21.140(2) — 9 cases

Johns v. Commonwealth, 394 S.W.2d 890 (Ky. Ct. App. 1965). “KRS 21.140(2). The question presented is whether the search of appellant’s automobile was legally accomplished.”

Duff v. Commonwealth, 464 S.W.2d 264 (Ky. Ct. App. 1971).

McGregor v. Commonwealth, 407 S.W.2d 705 (Ky. Ct. App. 1966).

Hunt v. Commonwealth, 408 S.W.2d 182 (Ky. Ct. App. 1966).

Helvey v. Commonwealth, 396 S.W.2d 780 (Ky. Ct. App. 1965).

— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 21.140(3) — 11 cases

Commonwealth v. Bailey, 71 S.W.3d 73 (Ky. 2002). “020(4)'s immediate statutory predecessor, KRS 21.140, was originally enacted in 1962 upon the repeal of the Code of Practice in Criminal Cases.”

Allen v. Walter, 534 S.W.2d 453 (Ky. 1976). “140, one of which reads as follows: “(4) When an appeal is taken pursuant to subsection (3), the Court of Appeals, if the record so warrants, may reverse the decision of the circuit court and order a new trial in any case in which a new trial would not constitute double jeopardy…”

Commonwealth v. Lewis, 548 S.W.2d 509 (Ky. 1977). “* Whether KRS 21.140(3) as it existed before amendment by the 1974 General Assembly governs the Commonwealth’s right of appeal in this case is immaterial.”

Commonwealth v. Devine, 396 S.W.2d 60 (Ky. Ct. App. 1965). “KRS 21.140(3). Devine has failed to respond.”

Commonwealth v. Sebastian, 500 S.W.2d 417 (Ky. Ct. App. 1973). “" Thereupon the Commonwealth perfected an appeal for a certification of the law pursuant to KRS 21.140(3). Two issues are involved, namely, (1) whether a wife's grant of permission to search a house jointly possessed by her and her husband, when the husband was absent, precluded…”

— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 21.140(4) — 1 case

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.