Opinion ID: 1451104
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: The Trial Court Erred In Failing to Instruct the Jury On the Seventy-Year Sentencing Cap Imposed by KRS 532.110(1)(c).

Text: Before the penalty phase of Allen's trial began, the prosecutor informed the trial court that he was aware Allen would serve, at most, seventy years in prison due to the sentencing cap imposed by KRS 532.110(1)(c). However, the Commonwealth argued that the jury should be permitted to impose a sentence in excess of that limit in order to send a message. The trial judge agreed, and the jury received no instructions on the seventy-year cap. As a result, the jury recommended that Allen serve six twenty-year sentences (for three counts of rape, and one count each of sodomy, kidnapping, and burglary) and two five-year sentences (for one count each of sexual abuse and tampering with physical evidence), with all sentences to run consecutively for a total of 130 years in prison. Despite this recommendation, at the final sentencing on August 15, 2007, the trial court reduced Allen's sentence in accordance with KRS 532.110(1)(c) and imposed a term of seventy years. On appeal, Allen requests that if this Court reverses his conviction based on his jury selection argument, a jury in any subsequent proceeding be instructed as to the seventyyear cap. Finding that the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury on this sentencing cap, and having already granted Allen a new trial, we agree that the jury in any subsequent trial should be instructed on the statutory seventy-year sentencing limit. KRS 532.055(2) governs how a jury sentences felony offenders after returning a guilty verdict, stating that the jury is to determine the punishment to be imposed within the range provided elsewhere by law. One sentencing range provided elsewhere by law that applies to felony offenders and that limits their total sentence is found in KRS 532.110(1)(c). KRS 532.110(1)(c) states that multiple sentences shall run concurrently or consecutively as the court shall determine at the time of sentence, and that [i]n no event shall the aggregate of consecutive indeterminate terms exceed 70 years. According to these statutes, Allen was subject to a maximum sentence of seventy years in prison. In running all his sentences consecutively, however, the jury recommended that he serve 130 years in prison. Allen is correct that this recommendation violated the plain language of KRS 532.055(2) and KRS 532.110(1)(c). Thus, the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury on the maximum allowable sentence under the statutes. Because we have already held that Allen is entitled to a reversal of his convictions and a new trial, we direct that the jury in any subsequent proceeding be instructed as to the sentencing cap set forth in KRS 532.110(1)(c).