Matter-of-Right Criminal Case Result Statistics Through May Renditions
Posted by Trevor on May 25th, 2007 toDecisions
Since January, the Court has rendered just shy of 50 Opinions in matter-of-right criminal cases, which should be a sufficient sample size to run a few numbers.
In the 49 rendered Opinions, the SCOKY has:
Affirmed the underlying judgment in 81.6% (40) of the Opinions
Affirmed the underlying judgment unanimously (as to result) in 73.5 % (36) of the Opinions.
Flat-reversed or reversed-and-remanded the entire case in 12.2% (6) of the Opinions.
Partially reversed the judgment in another 6.12% (3) cases).
Justices have dissented from the result (either with or without separate opinion) in 9 of the 49 Opinions. Justice Scott has been the most frequent dissenter in these cases, and has written or joined 4 dissenting opinions (all in cases where the majority of the Court voted to reversed the judgment below). Dissenting from 3 Opinions have been Justices Cunningham (1 from an “affirm” Opinion, 2 from “reverse” Opinions), Minton (1/2), Noble (2/1), and Schroder (3/0). Justice McAnulty has dissented from 2 Opinions (1/0/1). Chief Justice Lambert has not dissented from any of the 49 Opinions in the matter-of-right criminal cases.
For what it’s worth, the Court affirmed unanimously with respect to the other 3 Opinions rendered in matter-of-right appeals (all appeals from denials of writs by the Court of Appeals),
What, if anything, these statistics mean is anyone’s guess. SCOKYBLOG will endeavor to keep track and update these statistics after the August Renditions and again at the end of the year.
1 Response to “Matter-of-Right Criminal Case Result Statistics Through May Renditions”
Sorry, comments are closed for this article.
On a broader note, an article by Professors Theodore Eisenberg and Michael Heise (of Cornell Law) details empirical study of results on appeal from state trial court decisions. Interestingly, and perhaps counter-intuitively, the study indicates that appellate courts are *more* likely to overturn jury verdicts and bench decisions. I add 'counter-intuitively' simply given the strong rhetoric echoed to all first-year law students re: the high regard in which jury verdicts are held. It would be interesting to see at year's end the percentages of affirmances and reversals from Kentucky's Court of Appeals and Supreme Court for appeals brought by plaintiffs vis-a-vis those brought by defendants.