Kentucky Supreme Court Rules Prison Disciplinary Committee's "Conviction" Must Demonstrate Reliability Of Confidential Informants.

Court: Info about informants can't be withheld

The Kentucky Supreme Court has ruled that prison officials cannot withhold all information about confidential informants used in prison discipline cases.

The justices concluded that while the full slate of legal rights don't apply to disciplinary cases, an accused inmate cannot lose privileges and good time off their sentences without knowing something about the witnesses against them.

The ruling on Thursday came in the case of 39-year-old Ontario Thomas, who was sent to segregation for 180 days and docked two years of good time for allegedly striking a fellow inmate at the Northpoint Training Center in Burgin.
The disciplinary board relied on the word of a lieutenant, who testified that two confidential informants saw Thomas strike another inmate in a dispute.

Editor's note:You can read the court's opinion here.

BREAKING NEWS: KENTUCKY SUPREME COURT WISELY LIMITS GRANDPARENTS' VISITATION RIGHTS WHERE CHILD'S PARENTS OBJECT; OBJECTION NOW PRESUMED TO BE IN "CHILD'S BEST INTEREST" REBUTTABLE ONLY BY "CLEAR AND CONVINCING PROOF" TO THE CONTRARY.

Kentucky Supreme Court weakens grandparents' rights to see grandchildren

The Kentucky Supreme Court has made it harder for grandparents to win visitation with their grandchildren when the child’s parents object.

In a 6-1 ruling, the state’s high court ruled Thursday that parents who oppose giving a grandparent visitation must be presumed to be acting in the child’s best interests.

The court did not strike down Ken­tuc­ky’s 1984 grandparent visitation law but said a grandparent must present “clear and convincing” evidence to win the right to visit a grandchild over a parent’s objection.

“Kentucky courts cannot presume that grandparents and grandchildren will always benefit from contact with each other,” the court ruled. “If the only proof that a grandparent can present is that they spent time with the child and attended holidays and special occasions, this alone cannot overcome the presumption that the parent is acting in the child’s best interest.”

Writing for the court, Chief Justice John D. Minton Jr., said “the grandparent must show something more — that the grandparent and child shared such a close bond that to sever contact would cause distress to the child.”

Louisville family lawyers not involved in the case said the ruling will make it extremely hard for grandparents to win court-ordered visitation rights over a parent’s objection.

“That is an awful high legal standard,” said former Jefferson Family Court Judge Louis Waterman, adding that it gives “near-total authority” to parents.

The court reversed an order from Jefferson Family Court Judge Dolly Wisman Berry, giving visitation to Donna S. Blair for her grandson B.B., who is now 8, over the objection of his mother, Michelle L. Walker.

Blair said she had baby sat for the boy since he was born, took him to the zoo and the movies, gave him bubble baths and hosted his birthday parties.

But Walker said that, after the boy’s father killed himself, she feared for his safety and emotional well-being, because Donna Blair and her former husband blamed Walker for the suicide.

The court ordered Berry to conduct a new hearing, following the rules set down in its 20-page opinion.

The court said grandparents may win court-ordered visitation if they can show that the child would be harmed by denying it or where the grandparent and child lived in the same household for some time or the grandparent regularly baby sat the child.

The court directed judges to consider eight factors, including the nature and stability of the relationship between the child and the grandparent; the amount of time they had spent together; the effect that granting visitation would have on the child’s relationship with the parents; and the wishes and preferences of the child.

In a dissenting opinion, Justice Will T. Scott said he would have required grandparents to rebut the presumption in favor of parents based on a preponderance of the evidence, which is an easier burden to meet.

“It is beyond dispute that there is a societal presumption that it is usually healthier when a child has a loving relationship with a loving grandparent,” wrote Scott, who is seeking re-election against former Court of Appeals Judge Janet Stumbo.

The case marked the first time in 20 years that the state Supreme Court had tackled the issue, and the first time since the U.S. Supreme Court held in 2000 that parents have a constitutionally protected interest in raising their children without government interference.

Upholding the right of grandparents in a 1992 case from Boyle County, the state Supreme Court put parents and grandparents on equal footing in assessing the best interest of the child.

It also cited the benefit of visitation to the grandparent, who “can be invigorated by exposure to youth” and “avoid the loneliness that is so often a part of an aging parent’s life.”

But the court on Thursday said it was compelled by the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision to reverse its Boyle County ruling, which “is no longer good law.”

“So long as a parent is fit, there will normally be no reason for the state to inject itself in the private realm of the family,” the court said.

Blair’s lawyer, Denise Helline, said she found it troubling that "they set the bar too high." Walker’s lawyer, Mitchell Charney, said he hadn’t read the decision and couldn’t immediately comment.

No one tracks how many motions for grandparents’ visitation are filed in Kentucky, but Jefferson Family Court Judge Stephen George estimated in August that they are filed in about 5 percent of divorce and custody cases.

Waterman predicted that fewer will be filed now because attorneys will advise grandparents that it is less likely they will prevail.

Family lawyer Diana Skaggs, publisher of the blog “Divorce Law Journal,” who had predicted that if the court ruled Kentucky’s grandparent’s law unconstitutional it would mean “grandparents have no rights,” said she was glad the court didn’t do that.

But she agreed that the ruling means grandparents will have a tougher time getting courts to order visitation. “A loving relationship alone now is not enough.”

Editor's note:YOU CAN READ THE OPINION HERE (NOTE: REQUIRES PDF).

EDITOR'S COMMENT:I FIND IT PARTICULARLY INTERESTING THAT CHIEF JUSTICE JOHN MINTON, A DEMOCRAT, DISPLAYED REMARKABLE CONSERVATIVE PRINCIPLES HERE, WHILE JUSTICE WILL SCOTT, A REPUBLICAN, WENT THE OPPOSITE WAY DELIGHTING LIBERALS BY HIS DISSENT.

BREAKING NEWS: KENTUCKY SUPREME COURT RULES STUDENTS HAVE NO STATUTORY RIGHT TO ATTEND NEIGHBORHOOD SCHOOLS.

COURT: Ky students have no statutory "right" to attend neighborhood schools

LOUISVILLE, Ky. (WDRB) -- The Kentucky Supreme Court has ruled that Kentucky public school students have no statutory right to attend a particular school.

The ruling goes on to say that, "student assignment within a school district in Kentucky is a matter that the legislature has committed to the sound discretion of the local school board."

The decision comes as a serious blow to proponents of so-called "neighborhood schools."

Ted Gordon, the attorney for the plaintiffs' in the case, released the following statement after the ruling:

"While we will always respect the decision by the majority of the justices at the Kentucky Supreme Court, we have to wonder at the obvious attempts by JCPS to influence this decision by JCPS ever-changing student assignment plans," Gordon said. "With each new plan, JCPS has inched closer to neighborhood schools, which they realize that parents want and children need to improve the horrendous education that our children are now getting."

"All the parents in this case were courageous to take on the school system, and even though they did not win this round, they have made JCPS turn the corner, away from the outdated social experiment of busing," he continued. "Now these parents are hopeful that JCPS will start improving the education outcome for all our children."

JCPS officials have maintained that letting students attend the school closest to their home would return the community to segregation.

The court heard arguments from both sides in April, but the issue really boils down to one thing -- what does the word "enroll" mean?

Byron Leet of JCPS, said nowhere does the word "enroll" also mean "attend."

"We went to three different dictionary definitions of what it means to enroll. Not a one of those definitions, whether Black's Law Dictionary, the Oxford English Dictionary or the Merriam Webster Dictionary, tells us that the words enroll and attend mean the same thing," he said.

But Gordon, argued that it's clear what the legislature intended: "The common sense meaning applicable here is that enroll, there's no 'in,' there's no 'at,' enroll in that school is the contemplation that these children go to school where they enroll."

School district supporters warned of dire consequences should they lose.

"The schools in Jefferson County will resegregate," said Louisville NAACP president Raoul Cunningham in April. "There's no doubt. if you go back to a neighborhood concept of schools, there's no question, the schools will resegregate."

EDITOR'S NOTE Click HERE to read the ruling.

In A Welcome News, Kentucky Supreme Court Limits Police Use Of "Protective Sweeps" That Do Away With Our Constitutional Right To "Be Secure In Our Homes Against Warrantless Searches And Seisures". There Is A God!

Ky. court limits 'protective sweeps' by police By BRETT BARROUQUERE LOUISVILLE, Ky. — Lexington police told Crystal Lynn Guzman that, unless she agreed to allow a search of her apartment, an officer would remain with her while another got a warrant. Guzman consented to a warrantless "protective sweep" search in the early hours of Sept. 10, 2008, which turned up cocaine and drug paraphernalia and resulted in Guzman's arrest. But the Kentucky Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the threat of getting a search warrant amounted to an impermissible ruse by officers, who had no probable cause for a warrant. The ruling and threw out Guzman's conviction as well as the evidence seized in the search. The ruling sets new limits in Kentucky on how far police officers may go to gain access to homes and vehicles without a search warrant. "Even when a search is authorized by consent, the scope of the search is limited by the terms of its authorization," five justices wrote in an unsigned opinion. Justice Bill Cunningham wrote in a concurring opinion that using the threat of a search warrant without probable cause to get the document has become a dangerous and much used technique that "could be an exploding land mine." "When you have consent to enter into one's living room, you are not invited into the kitchen, or the bedroom, or the basement," Cunningham wrote. "Here, we are talking about the suppression of drugs. When the issue appears squarely before us in full bloom, it could mean the suppression of a murder weapon. Hopefully, this writing will help us avoid that more critical situation." When making an arrest, police have the right to search and control the immediate area around where the incident happened for their own safety. But, when making an arrest in a home, officers generally need some evidence of criminal wrongdoing in another part of the residence to continue searching. Without consent or an emergency circumstance, officers have to stop the search unless a warrant is granted. In this case, officers went to Guzman's apartment after a neighbor complained about possible drug transactions. Officers found Guzman and a man on the floor having sex when they arrived. Once Guzman turned on a lamp, officers asked if anyone else was in the apartment, to which Guzman responded no. Officers saw a blanket covering a doorway and conducted a "protective sweep" of the apartment. During the sweep, an officer found a spoon in the kitchen sink that had drug residue on it. That's when an officer asked for permission to search the entire apartment. Guzman refused and officers threatened to get a warrant do to so. The justices noted that there was no evidence of criminal wrongdoing seen in the living room and were told that no one else was in the apartment. Without consent, officers should not have conducted the sweep or been in the kitchen, the justices wrote. The justices noted that the "ancient" Fourth Amendment to the Constitution, as well as Section 10 of the Kentucky Constitution, protect citizens from warrantless search and seizures and "do not discern between rich or poor." "This apartment, its occupants, and their unseemly activities may not have measured up to an acceptable standard of decency," the justices wrote, but that didn't give officers the right to search the home. Cunningham noted that the method used by police "is fraught with constitutional problems." "Misinformation or deception by a law enforcement officer for purposes of obtaining consent to search will not be upheld," Cunningham wrote. Read more here: http://www.kentucky.com/2012/06/21/2232923/ky-court-limits-protective-sweeps.html#storylink=cpy Editor's comment; A great win for "We, the people". Editor's note: The case is CRYSTAL LYNN GUZMAN V. COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY, 2010-SC-000415-DG (2012) and can be read here.

Very Important Ruling From Kentucky Supreme Court: Kentucky Ebay Purchaser Cannot Sue Out Of State Seller In Kentucky Courts.

Yes, you heard it right!

You buy something on Ebay and you don't like it? Forget suing in Kentucky.

Read the court's very thoughtful opinion in the case of Hinners V. Robey.

Practice pointer: To my fellow practitioners of the law: Please note that this case is NOT limited to Ebay sales, but extends to ALL internet commerce styled like Ebay, where the sale is offered to EVERYONE and the seller does NOT specifically target Kentucky buyers.

Justice John Minton Is Kentucky's New Chief Justice.

Here is th press release:

Kentucky Court of Justice
John D. Minton Jr. elected new chief justice of Kentucky
Press Release Date: Monday, May 12, 2008
Contact Information: Leigh Anne Hiatt, APR
Public Information Officer
502-573-2350, x 4064
Cell-502-545-2839
lhiatt@kycourts.net
http://courts.ky.gov


FRANKFORT, Ky. -- On Monday, May 12, the justices of the Supreme Court of Kentucky elected the first new leader of the Judicial Branch in a decade. The justices chose John D. Minton Jr. as the fifth chief justice of Kentucky. Justice Minton will succeed Chief Justice Joseph E. Lambert, who announced April 24 that he would retire June 27.

Chief Justice Lambert will administer the oath of office for Chief Justice-Elect Minton at a formal investiture service at the Capitol on Friday, June 27. The public and the media will be invited to attend the swearing-in ceremony.

"I am honored by the vote of my colleagues," said Justice Minton in response to being elected chief justice. "I look forward to working with the members of the Court and the Court of Justice family in service to the citizens of the Commonwealth."

"Justice Minton is an outstanding scholar and a person of unquestioned integrity," said Chief Justice Lambert. "His experience serving as a judge for three levels of Kentucky courts equips him well to be an outstanding chief justice. I am delighted with his election."

Other justices on the Supreme Court are Deputy Chief Justice Will T. Scott and Justices Lisabeth Hughes Abramson, Bill Cunningham, Mary C. Noble and Wil Schroder.

Profile of Justice Minton
Justice Minton, 56, was elected to the Supreme Court of Kentucky in November 2006 to represent the 2nd Supreme Court District. He had been appointed to the high court on July 24, 2006, to fill a vacancy created by Supreme Court Justice William S. Cooper, who retired June 30, 2006. Prior to his appointment to the Supreme Court, Justice Minton served as a judge for the Kentucky Court of Appeals, representing the 2nd Appellate District. He was elected to the Court of Appeals in November 2003 and served there until his appointment to the Supreme Court in July 2006.

He was a circuit judge from 1992 to 2003 for the 8th Judicial Circuit, which consists of Warren County, before being elected to the Court of Appeals. From 1996 to 2003, he also served by special appointment of the late Chief Justice Robert F. Stephens and Chief Justice Lambert as chief regional judge for the Green River Region, a 21-county area.

While on the circuit bench, Justice Minton was recognized by the Kentucky Court of Justice for his leadership in forming the Warren County Drug Court and for his commitment to law-related education programs. In 2003, the Kentucky Bar Association honored him with its Outstanding Judge Award. He is also a graduate of the National Judicial College.

Before his election to the Circuit Court bench, Justice Minton practiced law in Bowling Green for nearly 15 years. He earned a bachelor's degree with honors in history and English from Western Kentucky University in 1974 and a law degree from the University of Kentucky College of Law in 1977. Justice Minton is a member of Broadway United Methodist Church in Bowling Green. He serves on the board of the Student Life Foundation at Western Kentucky University. He is also a member and past president of the Bowling Green Rotary Club and a former member of the board of directors of Shakertown at South Union.

Originally from Cadiz, Ky., Justice Minton grew up in Bowling Green where he continues to reside. He is married to the former Susan Lenell Page, a Bowling Green native. They have a daughter, Page Sullivan Minton, and a son, John D. Minton III.

Justice Minton is the son of Dr. and Mrs. John D. Minton of Bowling Green. Dr. Minton previously served at Western Kentucky University as a history professor and as the fifth president of that institution.

Quotes From Professional Colleagues

John Stanley Palmore
Chief Justice of Kentucky, 1977-1982
"I am proud of Justice Minton. I have long known him and his father. As a fellow Bowling Green boy, I believe this is a great tribute to the Warren County Bar Association. Justice Minton is a wonderful person and will be a wonderful chief justice."

Sara W. Combs, Chief Judge
Kentucky Court of Appeals
"It was an unfailing pleasure to work with John Minton at the Court of Appeals before he joined the Supreme Court. His integrity, good will, intelligence and gentle manner all contribute to make him an ideal choice to lead the Court of Justice."

Robert W. McGinnis, Chief Regional Circuit Judge
Harrison, Nicholas, Pendleton and Robertson Counties
"Justice Minton's exceptional service as a trial judge and chief regional judge uniquely qualify him to perform both judicial and administrative functions as our next chief justice. His uncommon ability to get along with his fellow judges earned their utmost respect and will serve him well as he leads the judiciary."

Diane Thompson, Nelson County Circuit Court Clerk
President of the Kentucky Association of Circuit Court Clerks
"I have had the honor of working with Justice Minton for many years. His integrity and knowledge of all levels of our court system are unprecedented. I am confident that he will provide tremendous support to circuit court clerks because he understands the critical function of our office. The citizens of our Commonwealth will truly benefit from Justice Minton being elected our new chief justice."

Charles E. English, Attorney at Law
English, Lucas, Priest & Owsley LLP, Bowling Green, Ky.
"I have known Justice Minton for a long time. He is bright, kind and has a good judicial temperament. I believe he will make an excellent chief justice."

Supreme Court of Kentucky
The Supreme Court of Kentucky is the state's highest court. The seven justices are elected from seven appellate court districts and serve eight-year terms. The Kentucky Constitution provides that the Supreme Court justices elect one of their fellow justices to serve as chief justice for a term of four years. As executive head of the statewide judicial system, the chief justice oversees the Administrative Office of the Courts in Frankfort and the 4,000 statewide employees of the Kentucky Court of Justice, including elected justices, judges and circuit court clerks. The chief justice proposes a biennial budget to the General Assembly and executes the Judicial Branch budget.

Chief Justices of the Supreme Court of Kentucky
John D. Minton Jr., June 27, 2008-
Joseph E. Lambert, 1998-2008
Robert F. Stephens, 1982-1998
John Stanley Palmore, 1977-1982
Scott E. Reed, 1976-1977

Salary of the Chief Justice of Kentucky
$137,832