Penn v. Commonwealth

12 Citing cases

  1. White v. White

    CIVIL 5:02-492-KKC (E.D. Ky. Sep. 16, 2021)   Cited 3 times

    RCr 11.42 motions attempting to denigrate the conscientious efforts of defense counsel on the basis that someone else could have handled the case differently or better will be accorded short shrift in this Court. See Penn v. Commonwealth, Ky., 427 S.W.2d 808 (1968). We find no reason to evaluate the performance of defense counsel through the clear prism of hindsight.

  2. Hill v. Commonwealth

    No. 2017-SC-000562-MR (Ky. Sep. 27, 2018)

    "'[A]ttempting to denigrate the conscientious efforts of counsel on the basis that someone else would have handled the case differently or better will be accorded short shrift in this court.'" Moore v. Commonwealth, 983 S.W.2d 479, 485 (Ky. 1998) (quoting Penn v. Commonwealth, 427 S.W.2d 808, 809 (Ky. 1968)).

  3. Sanders v. Commonwealth

    89 S.W.3d 380 (Ky. 2002)   Cited 85 times
    Concluding that "there is nothing to complain about related to ineffective assistance"

    We will not turn back the clock and retry cases in an effort to second guess what might have been done. Cf. Dorton v. Commonwealth, Ky., 433 S.W.2d 117 (1968); Penn v. Commonwealth, Ky., 427 S.W.2d 808 (1968).

  4. Moore v. Commonwealth

    983 S.W.2d 479 (Ky. 1998)   Cited 48 times
    Denying RCr 11.42 and CR 60.02 relief

    "RCr 11.42 motions attempting to denigrate the conscientious efforts of counsel on the basis that someone else would have handled the case differently or better will be accorded short shrift in this court." Penn v. Commonwealth, Ky., 427 S.W.2d 808, 809 (1968). Evidence relating to Appellant's intoxication was presented in the second trial through the introduction of Appellant's own testimony and the testimony of Don Whobrey, both of whom told the jury about Appellant's drug use on the night before the murder.

  5. Thomas v. Commonwealth

    NO. 2019-CA-000213-MR (Ky. Ct. App. Jun. 19, 2020)

    "RCr 11.42[] motions attempting to denigrate the conscientious efforts of counsel on the basis that someone else would have handled the case differently or better will be accorded short shrift in this court." Penn v. Commonwealth, 427 S.W.2d 808, 809 (Ky. 1968). Thomas does not provide any basis for concluding that a more diligent investigation would have uncovered evidence which could have been used to more vigorously go after the lead witness against him, who happened to be his spouse.

  6. Bussell v. Commonwealth

    NO. 2016-CA-000251-MR (Ky. Ct. App. Jan. 5, 2018)

    "'RCr 11.42 motions attempting to denigrate the conscientious efforts of counsel on the basis that someone else would have handled the case differently or better will be accorded short shrift in this court." Moore v. Commonwealth, 983 S.W.2d 479, 485 (Ky. 1998), as amended (Nov. 19, 1998) (quoting Penn v. Commonwealth, 427 S.W.2d 808, 809 (Ky. 1968)). Simply because Saferstein had expertise in many areas and worked in a supervisory capacity would not necessarily have led the jury to discount his testimony.

  7. Reed v. Commonwealth

    479 S.W.2d 608 (Ky. Ct. App. 1972)

    In all cases relating to ineffective assistance of counsel this court has said that in considering that question the circumstances surrounding the trial must be such as to shock the conscience of this court and make the proceeding a farce and a mockery of justice. Penn v. Commonwealth, Ky., 427 S.W.2d 808 (1968). Upon reading the trial record there is no basis for appellant's contentions inasmuch as he had competent counsel who did all that he apparently could in the defense of the appellant.

  8. Wooten v. Commonwealth

    473 S.W.2d 116 (Ky. Ct. App. 1971)

    The record refutes those allegations. Dorton v. Com., Ky., 433 S.W.2d 117 (1968); Penn v. Com., Ky., 427 S.W.2d 808 (1968); Dupin v. Com., Ky., 408 S.W.2d 443 (1966); Jones v. Com., Ky., 388 S.W.2d 601 (1965). He charged that the transcript of evidence on his trial did not accurately reflect the proceedings and that the bill of exceptions was suppressed.

  9. Stevenson v. Commonwealth

    445 S.W.2d 708 (Ky. Ct. App. 1969)

    See Schroader v. Thomas, Ky., 387 S.W.2d 312; Lawson v. Commonwealth, Ky., 386 S.W.2d 734. The allegations go further than merely to question the judgment or legal competency of counsel; they charge in effect such an indifference or lack of concern on the part of counsel as to amount to practically no real representation, in a case in which a death sentence could have been imposed and in which the actual sentence was eleven years above the minimum, KRS 433.140. Accordingly, the allegations on their face make out a potential case of a farce and a mockery within the rule stated in Penn v. Commonwealth, Ky., 427 S.W.2d 808. We hold that Robinson was entitled to a hearing on his motion.

  10. Page v. Commonwealth

    446 S.W.2d 552 (Ky. Ct. App. 1969)

    We are convinced that the appellant had adequate and effective representation. In Penn v. Commonwealth, Ky., 427 S.W.2d 808 (1968), this court stated: "* * * counsel's representation must be 'so lacking in competence that it becomes the duty of the court to observe such a condition and correct it * * * In all cases decided on this subject, the circumstances surrounding the trial must be such as to shock the conscience of the court and make the proceeding a farce and a mockery of justice.