Court Opinion

ID: 9404544
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-06-23 14:05:41.843078+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:20:15.119758
License: Public Domain

RENDERED: JUNE 16, 2023; 10:00 A.M.
                             NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

                    Commonwealth of Kentucky
                                Court of Appeals
                                   NO. 2022-CA-0923-MR

JOHN R. CECIL, JR.                                                     APPELLANT

                   APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT
v.                HONORABLE SUSAN SCHULTZ GIBSON, JUDGE
                          ACTION NO. 15-CR-000418

COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY                                                  APPELLEE

                                          OPINION
                                         AFFIRMING

                                         ** ** ** ** **

BEFORE: DIXON, GOODWINE, AND KAREM, JUDGES.

GOODWINE, JUDGE: John R. Cecil, Jr. (“Cecil”) appeals a Jefferson Circuit

Court order denying his motion to vacate his conviction under CR1 60.02. After

careful review, finding no error, we affirm.

                The Court summarized the facts of this case on direct appeal:

                     On December 28, 2014, Caroline Fouts and her
                companions were making their way on foot from

1
    Kentucky Rules of Civil Procedure.
                Gerstle’s Pub, in Jefferson County, to Diamond Pub and
                Billiards, to play pool. While crossing the road, Cecil
                struck Fouts with his car. Cecil continued a few blocks
                with Fouts on the roof of his car, before pulling into a
                parking lot. The parties disagree as to the exact location
                of the accident.

                       Cecil admitted he had five drinks prior to driving.
                A field sobriety test was not administered because the
                roads were too slippery as a result of heavy rains. Cecil
                was transported to Metro Corrections for a breathalyzer
                test. While waiting to take the test, Cecil stated to an
                officer his blood alcohol content would be very high, and
                he admitted he should not have been driving. Cecil’s
                breathalyzer results revealed his blood alcohol content to
                be .302. Fouts sustained numerous injuries due to the
                collision, including a broken right clavicle, humerus,
                ischium, and L5 vertebrae. She also shattered multiple
                bones in her elbow and tore her ACL.

                       Cecil was charged in a six-count indictment for
                assault in the first degree, wanton endangerment in the
                first degree, operating a motor vehicle while license is
                revoked, failure to stop and render aid, no motor vehicle
                insurance, and operating a motor vehicle while under the
                influence. Prior to trial, Cecil moved to suppress the
                results of his breathalyzer test on the basis that the
                corrections officer did not observe him for the requisite
                twenty minutes prior to conducting the test as required by
                KRS[2] 189A.103(3)(a). Specifically, he said that during
                the twenty-minute wait, he was allowed to use the
                restroom and, while relieving himself, the officer turned
                his back. The trial court denied his motion.

                      At trial, the Commonwealth presented testimony
                from the officer who administered the breathalyzer test.
                He said, “[I]n my personal and professional opinion, Mr.
                Cecil was too intoxicated to drive.” Cecil objected and

2
    Kentucky Revised Statutes.

                                            -2-
moved for a mistrial. The trial court sustained the
objection but denied Cecil’s motion for a mistrial. It
admonished the jury to disregard the testimony.

       The Commonwealth next presented expert
testimony from Captain Chad Mills of the Kentucky
State Police, an accident reconstructionist. He concluded
Fouts was in the crosswalk on Lexington Avenue when
Cecil ran a red light, hitting her. His opinion was
partially based on Fouts’ statement that she entered the
crosswalk on Lexington avenue while the “walking man”
symbol was showing. During his testimony, Captain
Mills stated he had no reason to disbelieve Fouts’
statement that she was in the crosswalk at the time of the
accident. Cecil objected on grounds of bolstering and,
again, moved for a mistrial. The trial court sustained the
objection, denied Cecil’s motion for a mistrial, and once
again admonished the jury to disregard the testimony.

        Cecil also presented expert testimony. Sonny
Cease, an accident reconstructionist, opined the
Commonwealth’s expert had the collision occurring in
the wrong place. He concluded Fouts had deviated from
the crosswalk and was hit on Frankfort Avenue where
Fouts’ boots, jacket, and the bezel from Cecil’s car were
found. He testified Cecil told him the light was green,
but he could not confirm this statement. At the end of
trial, Cecil moved for a directed verdict and objected to
instructing the jury on assault in the first degree. The
trial court denied his motion and submitted the case to
the jury. The jury convicted Cecil of assault in the first
degree and operating a motor vehicle while under the
influence. He was acquitted of all other charges. The
jury recommended an eleven-year sentence. Cecil
appeal[ed].

                            -3-
Cecil v. Commonwealth, No. 2018-CA-001046-MR, 2020 WL 4515286, at *1-2

(Ky. App. Jul. 24, 2020) (footnotes omitted). This Court found Cecil’s claims of

error without merit and affirmed the rulings of the Jefferson Circuit Court.

             On June 23, 2020, Cecil filed a pro se motion to vacate his conviction

under CR 60.02(b) newly discovered evidence, (c) perjury or falsified evidence,

and (d) fraud affecting the proceedings, other than perjury or falsified testimony.

Cecil later filed separate motions for an evidentiary hearing and appointment of

counsel. The Commonwealth responded.

             The circuit court appointed Cecil counsel to review the pleadings.

Counsel moved to withdraw, stating that the proceeding would not reasonably be

brought by a litigant expending his own funds.

             On September 2, 2021, the circuit court denied Cecil’s motion to

vacate his sentence under CR 60.02 and for an evidentiary hearing. The court

stated the “‘newly discovered evidence’ is purported to be the investigative

interviews conducted by Captain Chad Mills, and the false or perjured testimony is

described as the testimony of Chad Mills which . . . allegedly conflicts with some

of the witness statements.” Record (“R.”) at 641. Cecil takes issue with the

location of the collision, specifically whether it occurred inside or outside a

crosswalk. The circuit court found the “newly discovered evidence” of Chad

Mills’ interview “was provided to [defense] counsel ten months before trial. Any

                                          -4-
discrepancies between the witnesses’ testimony at trial and statements made

previously could have been addressed through cross-examination.” R. at 642.

Additionally, the court found “that there was nothing secret or hidden about these

interviews, and mere discrepancies between the statements do not qualify as

‘perjury’ or fraud upon the Court.” Id. This appeal followed.

             “We review the denial of a CR 60.02 motion under an abuse of

discretion standard.” Foley v. Commonwealth, 425 S.W.3d 880, 886 (Ky. 2014)

(citing Brown v. Commonwealth, 932 S.W.2d 359, 361 (Ky. 1996)). “The test for

abuse of discretion is whether the trial judge’s decision was arbitrary,

unreasonable, unfair, or unsupported by sound legal principles.” Commonwealth v.

English, 993 S.W.2d 941, 945 (Ky. 1999).

             On appeal, Cecil argues that the circuit court abused its discretion in

denying his CR 60.02 motion because it was prosecutorial misconduct for the

Commonwealth to introduce false or perjured testimony knowingly or

unknowingly at trial under CR 60.02(c). Cecil abandoned his arguments under CR

60.02(b) newly discovered evidence and CR 60.02(d) fraud. Motions brought

under CR 60.02(c) must be filed within “one year after the judgment.” The final

judgment was entered against Cecil on June 7, 2018, and he filed his CR 60.02

motion on June 23, 2020. Cecil filed his motion more than one year after the

judgment was entered against him. Though the circuit court did not address the

                                         -5-
timeliness of Cecil’s motion, “the judgment of a lower court can be affirmed for

any reason supported in the record.” Phelps v. Bluegrass Hosp. Management,

LLC, 630 S.W.3d 623, 630 (Ky. 2021).

             As Cecil’s motion under CR 60.02(c) was untimely, we need not

address the merits of his argument. Thus, we hold that the circuit court did not

abuse its discretion in denying Cecil’s motion to vacate his conviction under CR

60.02.

             For the foregoing reasons, we affirm the order of the Jefferson Circuit

Court.

             ALL CONCUR.

BRIEF FOR APPELLANT:                      BRIEF FOR APPELLEE:

John R. Cecil, Jr., pro se                Daniel Cameron
La Grange, Kentucky                       Attorney General of Kentucky

                                          Kristin L. Conder
                                          Assistant Attorney General
                                          Frankfort, Kentucky

                                        -6-