Pulliam v. Commonwealth
This text of 406 S.W.2d 724 (Pulliam v. Commonwealth) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Kentucky primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The sole ground for reversal raised on this appeal is that our habitual criminal procedure, which allows the reading to the jury of an indictment and a conviction of another offense (to determine if the appellant was a second offender), violated appellant’s rights under the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Federal Constitution and section 11 of the Kentucky Constitution. In three recent cases we have decided this question adversely to appellant’s contention. Jones v. Commonwealth, Ky., 401 S.W.2d 68; Wilson v. Commonwealth, Ky., 403 S.W.2d 705; and Cole v. Commonwealth, Ky., 405 S.W.2d 753 (decided June 17, 1966).
The judgment is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
406 S.W.2d 724, 1966 Ky. LEXIS 209, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pulliam-v-commonwealth-kyctapp-1966.