Kentucky Revised Statutes
Ky. Rev. Stat. § 29.130 (2026)
Repealed, 1954
✓ laws through the 2026 session (checked Sept. 2026)
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
KY-LRCapps.legislature.ky.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Catchline at repeal: When judge to draw jury lists from drum; number drawn; procedure; panels to be selected from lists. History: Repealed 1954 Ky. Acts ch. 7, sec. 28. -- Amended 1948 Ky. Acts ch. 3, sec.
1. -- Amended 1944 Ky. Acts ch. 23, sec. 6. -- Amended 1942 Ky. Acts ch. 85, secs. 1, 2. -- Recodified 1942 Ky. Acts ch. 208, sec. 1, effective October 1, 1942, from Ky. Stat. sec. 2243.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4
cases, 1943–1956 · leading case: Tarrence v. Commonwealth, 265 S.W.2d 40 (Ky. Ct. App. 1953).
Tarrence v. Commonwealth, 265 S.W.2d 40 (Ky. Ct. App. 1953). “KRS 29.130(3), 29.140(2) (b). Be that as it may, the statement of the trial judge supported by the presumption of regularity must be accepted as revealing the facts; Hopkins v.”
May v. Commonwealth, 171 S.W.2d 465 (Ky. Ct. App. 1943). “070, 3) the judge failed to certify the list of grand jurors when he drew them from the wheel, 4) in drawing the grand jury from the wheel the judge drew the names of twenty grand jurors rather than twenty-four as required by KRS 29.130. The motion to set aside the indictment…”
Cincinnati, Newport & Covington Ry. Co. v. Peluso, 293 S.W.2d 556 (Ky. Ct. App. 1956). “” However, at its 1948 session the General Assembly amended KRS 29.130, and omitted this requirement.”
Cincinnati, N. & C. Ry. Co. v. Tenkotte's Ex'r, 205 S.W.2d 503 (Ky. Ct. App. 1947). “KRS 29.130(1), 29.140(1). (2) In courts of counties containing a city of the first class (Jefferson) the procedure is substantially the same.”
Ky. Rev. Stat. § 29.130(1): 1 case
Cincinnati, N. & C. Ry. Co. v. Tenkotte's Ex'r, 205 S.W.2d 503 (Ky. Ct. App. 1947). “KRS 29.130(1), 29.140(1). (2) In courts of counties containing a city of the first class (Jefferson) the procedure is substantially the same.”
Ky. Rev. Stat. § 29.130(2): 2 cases
Cincinnati, Newport & Covington Ry. Co. v. Peluso, 293 S.W.2d 556 (Ky. Ct. App. 1956). “” However, at its 1948 session the General Assembly amended KRS 29.130, and omitted this requirement.”
Cincinnati, N. & C. Ry. Co. v. Tenkotte's Ex'r, 205 S.W.2d 503 (Ky. Ct. App. 1947). “KRS 29.130(1), 29.140(1). (2) In courts of counties containing a city of the first class (Jefferson) the procedure is substantially the same.”
Ky. Rev. Stat. § 29.130(3): 2 cases
Tarrence v. Commonwealth, 265 S.W.2d 40 (Ky. Ct. App. 1953). “KRS 29.130(3), 29.140(2) (b). Be that as it may, the statement of the trial judge supported by the presumption of regularity must be accepted as revealing the facts; Hopkins v.”
Cincinnati, N. & C. Ry. Co. v. Tenkotte's Ex'r, 205 S.W.2d 503 (Ky. Ct. App. 1947). “KRS 29.130(1), 29.140(1). (2) In courts of counties containing a city of the first class (Jefferson) the procedure is substantially the same.”
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.