Opinion ID: 2411770
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: correcting the verdict

Text: The verdict forms submitted to the jury to use to complete their verdicts covered thirteen separate offenses, including lesser included offenses where appropriate. They provided for a finding of guilty or not guilty of a wanton murder charge as to Delbert Coakley (and two potential lesser included offenses), and four charges of Assault I as to each of the injured passengers in the vehicles with Assault II provided as a potential lesser included offense, plus forms to cover driving under the influence (DUI) and driving on a suspended license. Initially, as to one of the passengers in Coakley's vehicle, Vernice Keil, the jury checked off that the appellant was guilty of both Assault I and the lesser included offense of Assault II, while omitting to check off any finding on the charges based on the injury to Connie Wilson. Although this obvious mistake was apparent on the face of the verdicts, nevertheless the verdicts were received, the jury polled, and then recessed for lunch, all without noticing the error. The error was not discovered until the instructions were being prepared for the penalty phase. Before proceeding into the penalty phase, the jury was informed of the error. When told they did not make a verdict as to the Wilson charges, the foreman responded, without being asked, first degree. All the jurors nodded in agreement and the foreman then signed the verdict form. After this procedure was completed, appellant's counsel objected and moved for a mistrial. Bogie v. Commonwealth, Ky., 467 S.W.2d 767, 769 (1971) held a court may point out incongruities that appear on the face of the verdict and require the jury to return a verdict consistent with the instructions. Curry v. Commonwealth, Ky., 406 S.W.2d 733 (1966), holds the jury may be reassembled at any time to correct a verdict when the defect is obviously one of form. The defect on this verdict was one of form and obviously did not reflect the intention of the jury. The procedure used to correct the verdict was not improper.