Opinion ID: 1768076
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Incorrect Standard

Text: Bowling argues that the trial court used the wrong standard when it ruled on his allegations concerning the improper exclusion of handicapped jurors. But the ruling complained of was an alternative ruling: ... even if the record did indicate that these two handicapped jurors were excused, there's nothing to indicate in this record ... that Mr. Bowling was denied his right to a fair trial. As stated above, we affirmed the trial court's ruling on this issue based on its finding that there was no evidence in the record to support the claim. Therefore, whether the trial court used an erroneous standard in its alternative holding is not relevant. For the reasons set forth above, we affirm the Laurel Circuit Court's denial of Bowling's RCr 11.42 motion. COOPER, GRAVES, KELLER, and WINTERSHEIMER, JJ., concur. STUMBO, J., concurs in result only. LAMBERT, C.J., not sitting.