Keeling v. Commonwealth
2012 Ky. LEXIS 160
Ky.2012Background
- Keeling was convicted but mentally ill of murder and first-degree assault, receiving life and 20 years respectively.
- Keeling suffers from schizophrenia; history includes delusions, hallucinations, inappropriate affect, and prior violent acts.
- May 27–28, 2004: Keeling stabbed Morefield (a stranger) and then stabbed his father Sam Keeling, who later died.
- Indictment history spans six years with prior competency proceedings; 2009 competency hearing found him competent.
- Trial culminated in GBMI verdict; issues on dismissal, instructions, competency, EED, suppression, and joinder were appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Validity of 2008 indictment dismissal | Keeling argues CR 41.02(3) dismissal lacked prejudice, constituting final adjudication. | Commonwealth contends proper dismissal mechanics and no preclusion of reindictment. | CR 41.02(3) unconstitutional in criminal cases; reindictment permissible with consent. |
| GBMI jury instructions | Brown and Star require GBMI instruction noting possible non-treatment. | Statutory language 'treatment shall be provided' suffices; no due process issue. | Court did not abuse discretion; no due process violation; instruction proper. |
| Competency determination | Two later psychiatrists found incompetence; trial court erred relying on older evaluation. | Current evidence supported competency; prior opinions not controlling. | Substantial evidence supported competency; no clear error in 2009 determination. |
| Assault under extreme emotional disturbance | Evidence could support EED; instruction warranted for Morefield stabbing. | No adequate triggering event; mental illness alone not enough for EED. | No EED instruction required; evidence did not show adequate provocation. |
| Suppression of statements to police | Mental illness could render statements involuntary under Miranda due to coercion. | No coercion; Miranda waiver valid; Connelly guiding standard. | No involuntariness; statements properly admitted; no suppression required. |
Key Cases Cited
- Brown v. Commonwealth, 934 S.W.2d 242 (Ky. 1996) (GBMI-related treatment concerns discussed)
- Star v. Commonwealth, 313 S.W.3d 30 (Ky. 2010) (GBMI instructions and treatment considerations addressed)
- Gibson v. Commonwealth, 291 S.W.3d 686 (Ky. 2009) (Separation-of-powers limits on dismissals with prejudice)
- Flynt v. Commonwealth, 105 S.W.3d 415 (Ky. 2003) (Separation of powers and pretrial diversion context)
- Hoskins v. Maricle, 150 S.W.3d 1 (Ky. 2004) (Judicial dismissal authority and executive power limits)