Opinion ID: 1574330
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: New Capital Sentencing Trial

Text: Finally, Bowling argues that in light of Roper v. Simmons , he is entitled to a new sentencing trial where a jury can consider the mitigating value of juvenile mental age in light of the substantive restriction against executing juveniles that did not exist in Kentucky until March 1, 2005. It is his belief that that there is a reasonable probability that at least one juror would have viewed the mitigating evidence differently had he or she known that juveniles could not be executed. Bowling's argument is wholly without merit. As we have previously noted, Kentucky has prohibited the imposition of capital punishment on juveniles who were under the age of sixteen at the time of offense since the enactment of KRS 640.040 in July 1987. As Bowling was tried in 1990, defense counsel was certainly able to make the same arguments in mitigation that he now seeks to make. Accordingly, the order of the Fayette Circuit Court denying Bowling relief under CR 60.02 and CR 60.03 is affirmed. Further, Bowling's motion to strike documents improperly included in the record on appeal is denied as moot. LAMBERT, C.J.; COOPER, GRAVES, SCOTT, and WINTERSHEIMER, JJ., concur. ROACH, J., not sitting.