Kentucky Revised Statutes

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 640.040 (2026)

Capital punishment and other prohibited dispositions

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

(1) No youthful offender who has been convicted of a capital offense who was under the age of sixteen (16) years at the time of the commission of the offense shall be sentenced to capital punishment. A youthful offender may be sentenced to capital punishment if he was sixteen (16) years of age or older at the time of the commission of the offense. A youthful offender convicted of a capital offense regardless of age may be sentenced to a term of imprisonment appropriate for one who has committed a Class A felony and may be sentenced to life imprisonment without benefit of parole for twenty-five (25) years. (2) No youthful offender shall be subject to persistent felony offender sentencing under the provisions of KRS 532.080 for offenses committed before the age of eighteen (18) years. (3) No youthful offender shall be subject to limitations on probation, parole or conditional discharge as provided for in KRS 533.060. (4) Any youthful offender convicted of a misdemeanor or any felony offense which would exempt him from KRS 635.020(2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), or (8) shall be disposed of by the Circuit Court in accordance with the provisions of KRS 635.060. Effective: July 15, 1998 History: Amended 1998 Ky. Acts ch. 606, sec. 187, effective July 15, 1998. -- Amended 1994 Ky. Acts ch. 396, sec. 14, effective July 15, 1994. -- Created 1986 Ky. Acts ch. 423, sec. 137, effective July 1, 1987.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 48 cases (15 in the last 5 years), 1988–2026 · leading case: Phon v. Com. of Ky., 545 S.W.3d 284 (Mo. Ct. App. 2018).
Phon v. Com. of Ky., 545 S.W.3d 284 (Mo. Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 10× “Phon is one of those offenders. This Court has recognized that the legislature's statutes have limited the harshest sentence for capital offenses committed while the offender is a juvenile to LWOP 25.”
Kozak v. Commonwealth, 279 S.W.3d 129 (Ky. 2008). · cites it 26× “Among those protections are KRS 640.040 and KRS 635.060. KRS 640.040(4) provides that "[a]ny youthful offender convicted of a misdemeanor or any felony offense which would exempt him from KRS 635.”
Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005). · cites it 2× “§ 17-9-3 (Lexis 2004) (same) Idaho Idaho Code § 18-4004 (Michie 2004) (same) Kentucky Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 640.040 (1) (Lexis 1999) (minimum age of 16) Louisiana La.”
Chipman v. Commonwealth, 313 S.W.3d 95 (Ky. 2010). · cites it 14× “First, KRS 640.040 is clearly and entirely intended to prohibit certain sentencing alternatives.”
Shepherd v. Commonwealth, 251 S.W.3d 309 (Ky. 2008). · cites it 4× “According to KRS 640.040, Shepherd’s statutorily authorized penalties were twenty to fifty years, life in prison, or life without parole for twenty-five years.”
State v. Bassett, 428 P.3d 343 (Wash. 2018). · cites it 2× “§ 21-6618 ; Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 640.040 (1) ; Diatchenko v.”
State of Iowa v. Damion John Seats, 865 N.W.2d 545 (Iowa 2015). · cites it 2× “See Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 640.040 (West, Westlaw through immediately effective legis.”
Thompson v. Oklahoma, 487 U.S. 815 (1988). · cites it 2× “1987)) (age 16); Kentucky (Ky. Rev. Stat. § 640.040(1) (1987)) (age 16); Maryland (Md.”
Commonwealth v. Carneal, 274 S.W.3d 420 (Ky. 2008). · cites it 5× “Indeed, this Court has described the provisions of KRS 640.040 as “ameliorative.” Britt v. Commonwealth, 965 S.”
Graham v. Florida, 176 L. Ed. 2d 825 (2010). · cites it 2× “§ 21-4622 (West 2007) Kentucky Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. § 640.040 (West 2008); Shepherd v.”
Bowling v. Commonwealth, 163 S.W.3d 361 (Ky. 2005). · cites it 2× “[8] KRS 640.040(1). [9] Roper v. Simmons, ___ U.”
Britt v. Commonwealth, 965 S.W.2d 147 (Ky. 1998). · cites it 12× “060, the child may also take advantage of the ameliorative provisions of KRS 640.040. The Commonwealth, on the other hand, argues that the plain wording of KRS 635.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 640.040(1) — 13 cases
Phon v. Com. of Ky., 545 S.W.3d 284 (Mo. Ct. App. 2018). “Phon is one of those offenders. This Court has recognized that the legislature's statutes have limited the harshest sentence for capital offenses committed while the offender is a juvenile to LWOP 25.”
Shepherd v. Commonwealth, 251 S.W.3d 309 (Ky. 2008). “According to KRS 640.040, Shepherd’s statutorily authorized penalties were twenty to fifty years, life in prison, or life without parole for twenty-five years.”
Thompson v. Oklahoma, 487 U.S. 815 (1988). “1987)) (age 16); Kentucky (Ky. Rev. Stat. § 640.040(1) (1987)) (age 16); Maryland (Md.”
Bowling v. Commonwealth, 163 S.W.3d 361 (Ky. 2005). “[8] KRS 640.040(1). [9] Roper v. Simmons, ___ U.”
Britt v. Commonwealth, 965 S.W.2d 147 (Ky. 1998). “060, the child may also take advantage of the ameliorative provisions of KRS 640.040. The Commonwealth, on the other hand, argues that the plain wording of KRS 635.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 640.040(2) — 1 case
Edwards v. Harrod, 391 S.W.3d 755 (Ky. 2013).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 640.040(3) — 10 cases
Commonwealth v. Carneal, 274 S.W.3d 420 (Ky. 2008). “Indeed, this Court has described the provisions of KRS 640.040 as “ameliorative.” Britt v. Commonwealth, 965 S.”
Britt v. Commonwealth, 965 S.W.2d 147 (Ky. 1998). “060, the child may also take advantage of the ameliorative provisions of KRS 640.040. The Commonwealth, on the other hand, argues that the plain wording of KRS 635.”
Edwards v. Harrod, 391 S.W.3d 755 (Ky. 2013).
Commonwealth v. Taylor, 945 S.W.2d 420 (Ky. 1997).
Mullins v. Commonwealth, 956 S.W.2d 222 (Ky. Ct. App. 1997).
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 640.040(4) — 6 cases
Kozak v. Commonwealth, 279 S.W.3d 129 (Ky. 2008). “Among those protections are KRS 640.040 and KRS 635.060. KRS 640.040(4) provides that "[a]ny youthful offender convicted of a misdemeanor or any felony offense which would exempt him from KRS 635.”
Chipman v. Commonwealth, 313 S.W.3d 95 (Ky. 2010). “First, KRS 640.040 is clearly and entirely intended to prohibit certain sentencing alternatives.”
Canter v. Commonwealth, 843 S.W.2d 330 (Ky. 1992).
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.