Court Opinion

ID: 9692148
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 15:44:30.728708+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:19:32.012825
License: Public Domain

VENTERS, J.,
dissenting.
There is no reasonable doubt in this case that in the second-degree robbery that Chipman committed, a firearm was used to persuade the robbery victim to surrender possession of Chipman’s camera. The Majority opinion imposes an unreasonably narrow interpretation of KRS 635.040(4) in holding that, because the gun was held in the hand of her accomplice instead of her own, she is immune from the enhanced punishment the legislature intended for youthful offenders who commit crimes with guns. While the Majority’s holding may seem benign, even compassionate, in this case of “a seventeen-year-old girl with no criminal history,” its sinister aspect will become glaringly apparent when invoked by youthful gang members with a violent and dangerous past. I therefore dissent.
SCHRODER, J., joins.