From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Patterson v. Commonwealth

Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals
Feb 22, 2013
NO. 2012-CA-000480-MR (Ky. Ct. App. Feb. 22, 2013)

Opinion

NO. 2012-CA-000480-MR

02-22-2013

MICHAEL PATTERSON APPELLANT v. COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY APPELLEE

BRIEF FOR APPELLANT: Michael Patterson, pro se Sandy Hook, Kentucky BRIEF FOR APPELLEE: Jack Conway Attorney General of Kentucky Matthew R. Krygiel Assistant Attorney General Frankfort, Kentucky


NOT TO BE PUBLISHED


APPEAL FROM JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT

HONORABLE BRIAN C. EDWARDS, JUDGE

ACTION NO. 10-CR-003007


OPINION

AFFIRMING

BEFORE: CAPERTON, COMBS, AND DIXON, JUDGES. COMBS, JUDGE: Michael Patterson, pro se, appeals from the order of the Jefferson Circuit Court entered February 14, 2012. The court's order denied Patterson's motion for shock probation filed pursuant to the provisions of Kentucky Revised Statute[s] (KRS) 439.265. Finding no error, we affirm.

On August 14, 2010, Patterson was involved in a violent domestic dispute that resulted in his indictment in October on the following charges: assault, unlawful imprisonment, wanton endangerment, and criminal mischief. On June 2, 2011, he agreed to plead guilty to a set of reduced charges. He also agreed to stipulate as to the violation of his conditions of probation in two other criminal matters. Patterson understood that the Commonwealth intended to request that his probation be revoked as a result of the probation violations. On July 22, 2011, the Jefferson Circuit Court entered its judgment of conviction and sentence.

On September 1, 2011, Patterson's counsel filed a motion for shock probation. Following a hearing, the trial court found that there was a substantial risk that Patterson would re-offend during any period of probation. The court also believed that he was in need of correctional treatment that could be most effectively provided by his commitment to a correctional institution. Therefore, the court entered an order denying shock probation on October 7, 2011.

On January 18, 2012, Patterson, pro se, filed a motion for shock probation. In addition to the motion, Patterson prepared and tendered an order to the court. The tendered order anticipated that Patterson's motion would be granted and so recited.

After a review of the second motion for shock probation, the trial court concluded that no new grounds had been identified in support of the relief that Patterson sought. Consequently, the court denied the motion. The court's order was handwritten on the bottom of Patterson's tendered order. It was entered on February 20, 2012. This appeal followed.

Patterson argues that the order of the Jefferson Circuit Court denying his motion for shock probation is unclear "as it was entered on the record on the same paper as the order granting shock probation." He also complains that there is "no legible signature on the document." Patterson urges that we reverse the order denying shock probation and remand for further proceedings. However, having carefully studied the record and the order about which Patterson complains, we disagree.

The record indicates that Judge Brian C. Edwards was the Jefferson Circuit Court Judge who presided over Patterson's case. The handwritten, signed, and dated order about which Patterson complains bears a signature entirely consistent with the orders previously signed by Judge Edwards. The signature is not illegible.

We also disagree with Patterson's contention that the order denying his motion for shock probation is unclear "as it was entered on the record on the same paper as the order granting shock probation." Patterson's tendered order (granting the motion for shock probation) was never signed by the court. Instead, the court's handwritten order denying the motion was signed and dated by the court. The order is not rendered unclear by the mere fact that it appears on the lower half of the same page of the order originally tendered by Patterson. The signed order modifies and nullifies Patterson's tendered order. It is unambiguous and is entirely sufficient in its current form.

We affirm the order of the Jefferson Circuit Court.

ALL CONCUR. BRIEF FOR APPELLANT: Michael Patterson, pro se
Sandy Hook, Kentucky
BRIEF FOR APPELLEE: Jack Conway
Attorney General of Kentucky
Matthew R. Krygiel
Assistant Attorney General
Frankfort, Kentucky


Summaries of

Patterson v. Commonwealth

Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals
Feb 22, 2013
NO. 2012-CA-000480-MR (Ky. Ct. App. Feb. 22, 2013)
Case details for

Patterson v. Commonwealth

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL PATTERSON APPELLANT v. COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY APPELLEE

Court:Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals

Date published: Feb 22, 2013

Citations

NO. 2012-CA-000480-MR (Ky. Ct. App. Feb. 22, 2013)