(1) A person is guilty of retaliating against a participant in the legal process when he or
she engages or threatens to engage in conduct causing or intended to cause bodily
injury or damage to the tangible property of a participant in the legal process or a
person he or she believes may be called as a participant in the legal process in any
official proceeding or because the person has participated in a legal proceeding:
(a) Attending an official proceeding, or giving or producing any testimony,
record, document, or other object produced at that proceeding;
(b) Giving information to a law enforcement officer relating to the possible
commission of an offense or a violation of conditions of probation, parole, or
release pending judicial proceedings;
(c) Vote, decision, or opinion; or
(d) Performance of his or her duty.
(2) Retaliating against a participant in the legal process is a Class D felony.
(3) In order for a person to be convicted of a violation of this section, the act against a
participant in the legal process or the immediate family of a participant in the legal
process shall be related to the performance of a duty or role played by the
participant in the legal process.
Effective: July 15, 2002
History: Amended 2002 Ky. Acts ch. 251, sec. 3, effective July 15, 2002. -- Created
1986 Ky. Acts ch. 212, sec. 7, effective July 15, 1986.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
8
cases (
4 in the last 5 years), 1997–2024 · leading case:
Commonwealth v. Burge, 947 S.W.2d 805 (Ky. 1997).
Commonwealth v. Burge, 947 S.W.2d 805 (Ky. 1997).
· cites it 2× “Further, the charge against Effinger of retaliating against a witness would have required proof that he attacked Tonya Madry because she had testified against him or reported him to law enforcement officials, KRS 524.”
Pettway v. Commonwealth, 470 S.W.3d 706 (Ky. 2015).
· cites it 5× “040 and retaliating against a participant in the legal process under KRS 524.055. The Commonwealth’s theory of the case was that Pettway killed Sheckles at De-juan Hammond’s direction to prevent her from testifying in.”
Radford v. Lovelace, 212 S.W.3d 72 (Ky. 2006).
· cites it 2× “KRS 524.055, retaliating against a witness, states that a person must engage, or threaten to engage, in bodily injury to the witness or cause, or threaten to cause, damage to tangible property of the witness.”
Tara K. Thomas v. Commonwealth of Kentucky (Ky. Ct. App. 2024).
· cites it 5× “The fact that Thomas sent messages to people close to Bumgarner is relevant evidence of her intent to make sure Bumgarner found out about the threat.”
John Ray Williams v. Commonwealth of Kentucky (Ky. 2024).
· cites it 4× “Thus, Williams’ prior sexual abuse conviction was relevant to the element of retaliatory intent required for the Commonwealth to obtain a conviction under KRS 524.055. See KRE 401 (“‘Relevant evidence’ means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is…”
Sanders v. Main Event Ent. (W.D. Ky. 2024).
· cites it 2× “If the complaint were to be even more liberally construed—a possibility that Main Event entertains, stretching the limits of that principle—Sanders also cited (1) a portion of the KCRA related to discrimination by employment agencies and licensing agencies, (2) the Kentucky…”
Steven Pettway v. Commonwealth of Kentucky (Ky. Ct. App. 2021).
“040 and retaliating against a participant in the legal process under KRS 524.055. The Commonwealth’s theory of the case was that Pettway killed Sheckles at Dejuan Hammond’s direction to prevent her from testifying in the upcoming murder trial of his younger brother, Lloyd…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 524.055(1) — 2 cases
Pettway v. Commonwealth, 470 S.W.3d 706 (Ky. 2015).
“040 and retaliating against a participant in the legal process under KRS 524.055. The Commonwealth’s theory of the case was that Pettway killed Sheckles at De-juan Hammond’s direction to prevent her from testifying in.”
John Ray Williams v. Commonwealth of Kentucky (Ky. 2024).
“Thus, Williams’ prior sexual abuse conviction was relevant to the element of retaliatory intent required for the Commonwealth to obtain a conviction under KRS 524.055. See KRE 401 (“‘Relevant evidence’ means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 524.055(1)(d) — 1 case
Tara K. Thomas v. Commonwealth of Kentucky (Ky. Ct. App. 2024).
“The fact that Thomas sent messages to people close to Bumgarner is relevant evidence of her intent to make sure Bumgarner found out about the threat.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 524.055(3) — 3 cases
Tara K. Thomas v. Commonwealth of Kentucky (Ky. Ct. App. 2024).
“The fact that Thomas sent messages to people close to Bumgarner is relevant evidence of her intent to make sure Bumgarner found out about the threat.”
John Ray Williams v. Commonwealth of Kentucky (Ky. 2024).
“Thus, Williams’ prior sexual abuse conviction was relevant to the element of retaliatory intent required for the Commonwealth to obtain a conviction under KRS 524.055. See KRE 401 (“‘Relevant evidence’ means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is…”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 524.055(8) — 1 case
Pettway v. Commonwealth, 470 S.W.3d 706 (Ky. 2015).
“040 and retaliating against a participant in the legal process under KRS 524.055. The Commonwealth’s theory of the case was that Pettway killed Sheckles at De-juan Hammond’s direction to prevent her from testifying in.”
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.