Kentucky Revised Statutes

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 218.140 (2026)

Repealed, 1972

✓ 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: Narcotic drugs to be delivered to state officials, etc. History: Repealed 1972 Ky. Acts ch. 226, sec. 33. -- Recodified 1942 Ky. Acts ch. 208, sec. 1, effective October 1, 1942, from Ky. Stat. sec. 3716-14.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 2002–2006 · leading case: Stidham v. Clark, 74 S.W.3d 719 (Ky. 2002).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Stidham v. Clark, 74 S.W.3d 719 (Ky. 2002). · cites it 4× “We need not decide whether this letter, standing alone, constitutes "evidence sufficient to support a reasonable belief that in camera review may yield evidence" of a violation of KRS 218.140(1) because (1) the letter was not filed as evidence in the Court of Appeals' record,…”

Williams v. Commonwealth, 213 S.W.3d 671 (Ky. 2006). “280, formerly KRS 218.140 and KRS 218.160). In other cases, it has been held that citizens have no expectation of privacy in information that is contained on the outside of one’s mail, United States v.”

Thacker v. Commonwealth, 80 S.W.3d 451 (Ky. 2002). “230, formerly KRS 218.140 and 218.160. . New York v. Burger, 482 U.”

— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 218.140(1) — 1 case

Stidham v. Clark, 74 S.W.3d 719 (Ky. 2002). “We need not decide whether this letter, standing alone, constitutes "evidence sufficient to support a reasonable belief that in camera review may yield evidence" of a violation of KRS 218.140(1) because (1) the letter was not filed as evidence in the Court of Appeals' record,…”

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.