Court Opinion

ID: 9689529
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 18:39:01.935787+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:18:49.951189
License: Public Domain

CUNNINGHAM, Justice,
concurring in result only.
Our decision today is consistent with our most recent case of Bell v. Commonwealth, 245 S.W.3d 738 (Ky.2008), only if our finding of palpable error is unique to the facts of this case. For instance, as in Bell, where we held harmless error, if the defendant had been found guilty under all of *705the identical instructions then there would be no palpable error. “Because the jury ultimately found Bell guilty of all five counts of sexual abuse, it can be rationally and fairly deduced that each juror believed Bell was guilty of the five distinct incidents identified by the Commonwealth.” Id. at 744. When the jury, as here, finds the defendant guilty under three of the identical instructions, and not guilty on the other three, a different picture is painted. As stated in Bell, “[I]t must be evident and clear from the instructions and verdict form that the jury agreed, not only that Bell committed one count of sodomy, but also exactly which incident they all believed occurred. Otherwise, Bell is not only denied a unanimous verdict, but is also stripped of any realistic basis for appellate review of his conviction for sodomy.” Id.
Furthermore, since here the jury found the defendant not guilty under three of the identical instructions, it is premature for us to do an analysis on the sufficiency of the evidence. We do not know exactly which criminal acts the jury unanimously found the defendant guilty of. Therefore, we should simply reverse and remand for a new trial without addressing the sufficiency of the evidence issue.
SCHRODER, J., joins this opinion.