Lloyd Bandy v. Commonwealth of Kentucky
2016 SC 000489
| Ky. | Sep 26, 2017Background
- Lloyd Bandy, serving a prior sentence, was indicted for multiple counts of first-degree sodomy, first-degree sexual abuse, and attempted first-degree rape involving a victim under 12.
- Prison letters written by Bandy confessing to the offenses were discovered and provided to police; Bandy later again confessed during police interview.
- Commonwealth presented the confession letters, the victim’s testimony describing multiple instances of abuse, and investigator testimony corroborating a timeframe when the victim was under 12.
- Bandy contended his confessions were coerced and argued the Commonwealth failed to narrow the time period sufficiently and that convictions rested improperly on uncorroborated confessions.
- At trial Bandy moved for directed verdicts twice (one motion asserting the timeframe was too vague; the other asserting insufficient corroboration per RCr 9.60). The trial court denied both motions; the jury convicted and the court imposed the recommended sentences.
- On appeal Bandy also argued the trial court erred by not reading all jury instructions verbatim; that claim was unpreserved at trial.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Bandy) | Defendant's Argument (Commonwealth) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of timeframe evidence for submission to jury | Time period (e.g., two-year span) is too vague to support jury verdicts | Child victims need not provide exact dates; testimony plus corroboration suffices | Denied — evidence as whole permitted reasonable jury to find victim was under 12; directed verdict not warranted |
| Whether convictions were based on uncorroborated confessions (RCr 9.60) | Confessions were the but-for cause of other evidence and, without them, corpus delicti was not proven — conviction improperly relied on confession alone | Corpus delicti was established by victim testimony and investigation; confession may then establish defendant's culpability | Denied — corpus delicti and corroboration satisfied; RCr 9.60 met |
| Specificity of victim testimony re: particular charged counts/instructions | Victim’s testimony lacked specificity to support certain instructions (instructions 6,10,11) | Victim gave detailed accounts of multiple abuse instances that reasonably identified each alleged offense | Denied — testimony and investigation sufficiently corroborated alleged offenses |
| Trial court’s failure to read all jury instructions verbatim | Failure to read every instruction deprived Bandy of required procedural protections | Defense did not timely object or offer preserved instruction; RCr 9.54(2) requires preservation | No review — issue unpreserved; statutory rule bars appellate review; affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- Benham v. Commonwealth, 816 S.W.2d 186 (Ky. 1991) (standard for directed verdict and review of sufficiency)
- Lofthouse v. Commonwealth, 13 S.W.3d 236 (Ky. 2000) (RCr 9.60/corroboration requirement and role of confession)
- Stringer v. Commonwealth, 956 S.W.2d 883 (Ky. 1997) (child-victim need not prove precise date; date not always material)
- Blades v. Commonwealth, 957 S.W.2d 246 (Ky. 1997) (corroboration and use of confession)
- Sawhill v. Commonwealth, 660 S.W.2d 3 (Ky. 1983) (articulating directed-verdict review principles)