Court Opinion

ID: 9643316
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 20:25:26.383756+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:10:59.300908
License: Public Domain

MONTGOMERY, Judge
(dissenting).
I respectfully dissent from so much of the majority opinion as declines to dismiss the appeal.
The majority opinion points out very thoroughly and convincingly- that there is no merit in the arguments advanced on appeal but fails to discuss the failure to dismiss the appeal. The record shows that appellant’s notice of appeal was not filed within the time provided by RCr 12.54. Extension of such time is expressly prohibited. RCr 1.10. The latter rule also provides that the provisions of the Rules of Civil Procedure as to time shall apply to the procedures in the Rules of Criminal Procedure when the latter rules do not specifically provide otherwise.
By analogy, under the Rules of Civil Procedure, the running of the appeal time is not affected by the failure of the party adversely affected to receive notice of entry of the judgment or order. Brown v. Harris, Ky., 321 S.W.2d 781; Commonwealth Dept. of Highways v. Hatcher, Ky., 386 S.W.2d 262 (decided January 22, 1965). The time requirement is mandatory and jurisdictional. Electric Plant Board of City of Hopkinsville v. Stephens, Ky., 273 S.W.2d 817; Hawks v. Wilbert, Ky., 355 S.W.2d 655.
The failure to discuss the dismissal contention raises pertinent questions which, should have been considered and answered. Does the majority opinion mean that the-pertinent Rules of Criminal Procedure have-been abrogated? Is this true in cases of' direct appeal from judgments of conviction and in appeals from rulings in RCr 11.42' cases alike, or does it apply only to the latter as in this case? Fallen v. United States, 378 U.S. 139, 84 S.Ct. 1689, 12 L.Ed.2d 760, given as authority for sustaining the appeal, dealt with a direct appeal from a judgment of conviction. This might be-considered as distinguishing it from this case, although I am not convinced that Fallen is right.
Does the majority opinion apply only to-prisoners or indigent accuseds or does it apply alike to all who may have run afoul of the criminal la.ws? If it does not apply to all, then it is indicative of a double standard of justice which has no proper foundation and should not be.
Will the majority opinion become known as the Collier exception to the established rule? RCr 13.08 provides the method of amending the Rules of Criminal Procedure-How is it affected by such change? Is the Court falling into the childish practice of changing its rules in the middle of the game, so to speak, as each case arises?
*861It seems to me that the majority opinion should have answered these questions for the guidance of the bench and bar instead of leaving their members to guess as to its meaning.
I agree that the appellant is entitled to no relief but his meritless appeal should have been dismissed. The Court could better occupy its time in consideration of more deserving litigation.
For these reasons I respectfully dissent.