Tarvous Rantray Haskins v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, Operating in Its Capacity as Christian County Attorneys Office

Opinion

RENDERED: SEPTEMBER 4, 2026; 10:00 A.M.

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

Commonwealth of Kentucky

Court of Appeals

NO. 2025-CA-0513-DG

TARVOUS RANTRAY HASKINS APPELLANT

ON REVIEW FROM CHRISTIAN CIRCUIT COURT v. HONORABLE JOHN L. ATKINS, JUDGE ACTION NO. 25-XX-00002

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY APPELLEE

OPINION

VACATING AND REMANDING

** ** ** ** **

BEFORE: CALDWELL, ECKERLE, AND TAYLOR, JUDGES. CALDWELL, JUDGE: Tarvous Rantray Haskins (“Haskins”) appeals the order of the Christian Circuit Court which granted the Commonwealth’s motion to dismiss his appeal from Christian District Court. Following careful review of the record and the law, we vacate the order and remand for reinstatement of Haskins’s appeal.

As noted above, this matter originated in Christian District Court wherein Tarvous Rantray Haskins pleaded guilty to one count of possession of

2

marijuana on January 8, 2025. Haskins timely filed a notice of appeal to Christian Circuit Court on January 29, 2025. However, he did not file his statement of appeal until March 26, 2025, well past the 30-days allowed.

In response to Haskins’s statement of appeal, the Commonwealth promptly filed a motion to dismiss the appeal entirely. Haskins responded that counsel was responsible for the tardiness due to a mix-up in the electronic filing system. He argued that the appeal was still alive because the late filing occurred after it had been commenced by a punctual notice of appeal.

Nonetheless, the circuit court granted the Commonwealth’s motion and dismissed the appeal on April 18, 2025. Haskins then filed a motion for discretionary review by this Court, which we granted.

The underlying facts of the crime are not germane to this appeal. The narrow issue before us is procedural. Therefore, our standard of review is de novo. Humber v. Lexington-Fayette Urban Cnty. Gov’t, 553 S.W.3d 273, 276 (Ky. App. 2018).

We begin by noting that the circuit court applied the wrong standard when it held that “[s]trict enforcement of the Rules of Appellate Procedure is the standard that must be followed by this Court when sitting in an appellate case. . . . Therefore, the motion to dismiss the appeal is granted.” Our Supreme Court has held that the correct standard is “[e]xcepting for tardy appeals and the naming of

3

indispensable parties, we follow a rule of substantial compliance.” Johnson v. Smith, 885 S.W.2d 944, 950 (Ky. 1994).

We must first determine the significance of the statement of appeal in an appeal to a circuit court. Kentucky Rules of Appellate Procedure (“RAP”) 48 controls appeals from district court to circuit court. It sets forth that 30 days after filing a notice of appeal, an appellant must file a statement of appeal. RAP 48(F)(1). RAP 48(G)(3) details what the statement of appeal consists of:

(a) A “Statement of the Case” consisting of a concise summary of the facts, and procedural events in the district court that are necessary to an understanding of the issues presented by the appeal, with ample references to the specific location in the record supporting each of the statements contained in the summary;

(b) An “Argument” consisting of a concise statement of the legal claims on which the appellant relies for relief and citations to the legal authorities that support the claims;

(c) A specific statement of the relief that the Appellant seeks;

(d) A statement as to whether oral argument is desired;

and

(e) A statement as to whether the matter has been before the circuit court on any previous occasion and whether reference to the record of the prior appeal is necessary.

4

This is analogous to RAP 32(A), which prescribes the content of briefs in this Court and the Kentucky Supreme Court. It also requires a statement regarding oral argument; a statement of the case; a summary of the facts with ample citations to the record; an argument that includes the legal authority for the relief sought; and a conclusion setting forth the relief sought. Therefore, for all intents and purposes, the statement of the appeal is an appellate brief.

Our Supreme Court has held that failure to file an appellate brief is per se ineffective assistance of counsel, and it is not lethal to an appeal. Commonwealth v. Wine, 694 S.W.2d 689, 695 (Ky. 1985). “[D]ue process requires an appellant in a criminal case to be provided with effective assistance of counsel.” Id. (citing Evitts v. Lucey, 469 U.S. 387 (1985)).

When the appellant did not condone, or agree to, or contribute to the ineffective conduct that led to dismissal, the appeal must be reinstated. Id. The Wine court also pointed out that “failure to comply with procedural rules on appellate practice in criminal cases can be enforced through the use of sanctions and disciplinary proceedings against attorneys, but not by the dismissal of an appeal.” Id.

In conclusion, the law mandates that we vacate the circuit court’s order dismissing Haskins’s appeal and remand to Christian Circuit Court for reinstatement of the appeal.

5

ALL CONCUR.

BRIEF FOR APPELLANT: BRIEF FOR APPELLEE:

Ramon McGee Russell Coleman Louisville, Kentucky Attorney General of Kentucky

Courtney J. Hightower

Assistant Attorney General Frankfort, Kentucky