Ky. Rev. Stat. » Chapter 29A
Kentucky Revised Statutes

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 29A.270 (2026)

Right to jury trial

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KY-LRCapps.legislature.ky.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

(1) Defendants shall have the right to a jury trial in all criminal prosecutions, including prosecutions for violations of traffic laws, in the Circuit and District Courts. The defendant may request a jury trial at any time prior to the time his case is called for trial.

(2) There shall be no right to a jury trial in civil actions in which the amount in controversy does not exceed two hundred and fifty dollars ($250).

(3) Nothing in this section shall be construed to restrict the power of the judge to punish for contempt of court. Effective: January 2, 1978 History: Amended 1978 Ky. Acts ch. 289, sec. 1, effective June 17, 1978. -- Created 1976 (1st Extra. Sess.) Ky. Acts ch. 22, sec. 38, effective January 2, 1978.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1984–2026 · leading case: Commonwealth v. Green, 194 S.W.3d 277 (Ky. 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Commonwealth v. Green, 194 S.W.3d 277 (Ky. 2006). · cites it 22× “Because they were decided before both the adoption of the relevant criminal rule and the enactment of KRS 29A.270, these cases are not dispositive of the issue.”
State v. James Denelsbeck(075170), 137 A.3d 462 (N.J. 2016). “Kentucky 1 See Ky. Rev. Stat. §§ 29A.270(1), 189A.010. Louisiana 3 See La.”
Donta v. Commonwealth, 858 S.W.2d 719 (Ky. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “True enough, KRS 29A.270 guarantees defendants jury trials in all criminal prosecutions, including those for even the most minor types of offenses.”
Wilson v. Commonwealth, 765 S.W.2d 22 (Ky. 1989). “KRS 29A.270(1) provides that a defendant shall have a right to a jury trial in all criminal prosecutions.”
Crone v. Commonwealth, 680 S.W.2d 138 (Ky. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 3× “We believe the jury trial issue resolves this appeal.”
State v. James Denelsbeck(075170) (N.J. 2016). “Kentucky 1 See Ky. Rev. Stat. §§ 29A.270(1), 189A.010. Louisiana 3 See La.”
Mary Johnson v. Charles Bielefeld, Jr. (Ky. Ct. App. 2022). “Johnson’s argument further ignores KRS 29A.270(3), concerning a defendant’s right to a jury trial, which provides: “Nothing in this section shall be construed to restrict the power of the judge to punish for contempt of court.”
Joshua T. Hammond v. Commonwealth of Kentucky (Ky. 2019). “KRS 29A.270; U.S. Const, amend. VI. “Cases required to be tried by jury shall be so tried unless the defendant waives a jury trial in writing with the approval of the court and the consent of the Commonwealth.”
Jeffrey Rowland v. Commonwealth of Kentucky (Ky. 2019). “The Commonwealth likewise benefitted from the plea deal: without Rowland’s express waiver of his right to appeal, the Commonwealth faced the risk of reversal and remand.”
LLC Consulting & Lesley Vowels v. Tech. Plus, et al (W.D. Ky. 2026). “That list is followed by this caption: “DEMAND FOR TRIAL BY JURY SECTION 7 OF THE KENTUCKY CONSTITUTION AND KRS 29A.270, CR 38.01- 38.03.” Id. at PageID# 11 (emphasis in original).”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 29A.270(1) — 5 cases
Commonwealth v. Green, 194 S.W.3d 277 (Ky. 2006). “Because they were decided before both the adoption of the relevant criminal rule and the enactment of KRS 29A.270, these cases are not dispositive of the issue.”
State v. James Denelsbeck(075170), 137 A.3d 462 (N.J. 2016). “Kentucky 1 See Ky. Rev. Stat. §§ 29A.270(1), 189A.010. Louisiana 3 See La.”
Wilson v. Commonwealth, 765 S.W.2d 22 (Ky. 1989). “KRS 29A.270(1) provides that a defendant shall have a right to a jury trial in all criminal prosecutions.”
Crone v. Commonwealth, 680 S.W.2d 138 (Ky. Ct. App. 1984). “We believe the jury trial issue resolves this appeal.”
State v. James Denelsbeck(075170) (N.J. 2016). “Kentucky 1 See Ky. Rev. Stat. §§ 29A.270(1), 189A.010. Louisiana 3 See La.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 29A.270(3) — 1 case
Mary Johnson v. Charles Bielefeld, Jr. (Ky. Ct. App. 2022). “Johnson’s argument further ignores KRS 29A.270(3), concerning a defendant’s right to a jury trial, which provides: “Nothing in this section shall be construed to restrict the power of the judge to punish for contempt of court.”
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.