Kentucky Revised Statutes

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 421.230 (2026)

Definitions for KRS 421.230 to 421.270

✓ current as of May 2026

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

(1) The word "witness" as used in KRS 421.230 to 421.270 shall include a person whose testimony is desired in any proceeding or investigation by a grand jury or in a criminal action, prosecution or proceeding. (2) The word "state" shall include any territory of the United States and District of Columbia. (3) The word "summons" shall include a subpoena, order or other notice requiring the appearance of a witness. Effective: June 19, 1952 History: Created 1952 Ky. Acts ch. 132, sec. 1, effective June 19, 1952.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 9 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1977–2022 · leading case: Lovett v. Commonwealth, 103 S.W.3d 72 (Ky. 2003).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Lovett v. Commonwealth, 103 S.W.3d 72 (Ky. 2003). · cites it 2× “Appellant claims that the prosecution did not make a "good faith effort" to obtain the presence of the confidential informant at trial because it did not resort to KRS 421.230 to 421.270, the "Uniform Act to Secure the Attendance of Witnesses from Within or Without a State in…”

Hodge v. Commonwealth, 17 S.W.3d 824 (Ky. 2000). “On October 11, 1996, Appellant obtained an order pursuant to KRS 421.230, -et seq., to secure O’Brien’s attendance at'the proposed deposition.”

Stinnett v. Commonwealth, 364 S.W.3d 70 (Ky. 2011). “The Uniform Act to Secure the Attendance of Witnesses from Within or Without a State in Criminal Proceedings, codified in KRS 421.230 to KRS 421.270, establishes the means by which a defendant may secure the attendance of witnesses necessary for his defense.”

Krugman v. CMI, Inc., 437 S.W.3d 167 (Ky. Ct. App. 2014). “Kentucky’s version of the Uniform Act is codified at KRS 421.230 to 421.270. . In the Montana case, the Daviess Circuit Court entered CMI's proposed protective order tailoring the disclosure of the source code in a manner that protected CMI's confidential trade secrets by…”

Ross v. Commonwealth, 577 S.W.2d 6 (Ky. Ct. App. 1977). “, 553 S.W.2d 44 (1977) (24 K.L.S. 8, pg. 1), even though the presence of a state prisoner might be compelled under the Uniform Act to Secure the Attendance of *11 Witnesses (KRS 421.”

Yeary v. State, 690 S.E.2d 901 (Ga. Ct. App. 2010). “286 ( 254 SE2d 409 ) (1979); OCGA § 24-10-94; Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 421.230 et seq. The judge in this state must make certain findings under the Uniform Act, including a finding that the out-of-state witness is a material witness in the prosecution pending in this state.”

Lokk v. CMI, Inc., 457 S.W.3d 330 (Ky. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 3× “The order provided in relevant part as follows: This is a proceeding pursuant to KRS 421.230 to 421.270, the Kentucky Uniform Act.”

Commonwealth of Kentucky v. Steven D. Roark (Ky. 2021). “Additionally, the Court of Appeals’ interpretation of 3 KRS 421.230 - 421.270. 7 Lovett’s import is directly contrary to otherwise clear statements of law on point.”

Commonwealth of Kentucky v. Steven D. Roark (Ky. 2022). “4 KRS 421.230 - 421.270. 7 The reliance upon St.”

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.