Attorney Jason Apollo Hart's Legal Cases

Appeals

Tapp v. Commonwealth, 2014-SC-000607-DG To be published

Sep 22, 2016

OUTCOME: Reversal and affirmed.

*Attorney Jason Hart briefed this case in the appellate courts. His supervisors name ended up on the opinion because Jason transferred to the Capital Trial Branch East of the Department for Public Advo ... cacy* The circuit court revoked David Tapp's probation. On appeal, the Court of Appeals vacated the circuit court's order, and the Commonwealth appeals from that Court's opinion. With a critical difference in analysis and for the reasons set forth below, we affirm. The language of KRS 533.020(4) is clear: probation is automatically discharged upon completion of a probationary period unless it has been revoked or an arrest warrant is pending. If neither condition exists, the trial court loses jurisdiction both to revoke and to modify the conditions of probation. A warrant remains "pending" until the defendant is brought before the court at which time, given probable cause to do so, the court may extend the probationary period for a reasonable time until a revocation hearing can be held. Because Tapp's probationary period was not extended, the court lost jurisdiction to revoke his probation. However, this Opinion will give the necessary guidance to the next trial court faced with similar circumstances. For the above stated reasons, the decision of the Court of Appeals is affirmed.

Appeals

Muchrison v. Commonwealth, 2014-CA-001375-MR To be published

Jul 08, 2016

OUTCOME: Reversal

Appellant, Brian Keith Muchrison, appeals from a verdict and judgment of conviction entered by the Mason Circuit Court following a jury trial. Having reviewed the record, we reverse. Muchrison takes ... the position on appeal that the trial court’s denial of his attorney’s motion to withdraw deprived him of a fair trial. He adopts the position taken by his trial counsel in the motion to withdraw. Trial counsel’s position was that his representation of Trent, and the ethical responsibilities inherent therein, precluded him from fully exploring exculpatory facts in his crossexamination of Suister, which prevented him from fully presenting Muchrison’s defense. ... The trial court’s ruling diminishes the fact that trial counsel’s original source of information, which he would later need in order to effectively represent another client, was a confidential communication with his client. Further, the identity of the confidential informant was exactly that—confidential—until such time as the Commonwealth made it a matter of public record mere hours before trial. The trial court also clearly recognized the potential presence of a conflict of interest; otherwise the order for trial counsel to discontinue representation of Trent served as a completely moot gesture. That Muchrison’s trial counsel was able to find a different line of questioning to establish Suister’s motive to fabricate a narcotics transaction is immaterial. The conflict manifested itself the instant trial counsel was forced by his obligations to Trent to search for such alternative line of questioning. The ethical dilemma placed on trial counsel by the trial court’s ruling limited his ability to cross-examine a critical witness, and thus deprived him of the right to effective counsel. This Court thus concludes that the trial committed reversible error in failing to permit Muchrison’s trial counsel to withdraw.

Appeals

Martin v. Commonwealth, 2013-SC-000519-MR To be published

Feb 19, 2015

OUTCOME: Reversal and remand.

A circuit court jury convicted Joseph David Martin of fourteen counts of first-degree unlawful transaction with a minor,' fourteen counts of incest, and a single count each of use of a minor in a sex ... ual performance, complicity to tampering with a witness, and complicity to tampering with physical evidence. The jury recommended Martin consecutively serve the statutory maximum for each conviction, totaling 580 years. And the trial court adopted this recommendation in full—ignoring the consecutive-sentence cap in Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) 532.110—and imposed a sentence of 580 years' imprisonment. Martin appeals from the resulting judgment as a matter of right. Martin alleges the trial court erred by (1) instructing the jury in a manner that violated his right to a unanimous verdict; (2) failing to instruct the jury regarding the consecutive-sentence cap in KRS 532.110 or to impose a sentence consistent with that cap; and (3) allowing the victim during her testimony at trial to refresh her memory with previously written notes. We agree with Martin that the trial court's jury instructions, except for those pertaining to his complicity charges, denied him a unanimous verdict. So we are constrained to reverse those convictions. We find no error in Martin's complicity to tampering with a witness and complicity to tampering with physical evidence convictions. And we affirm those convictions. We address the other allegations of error as they may be relevant to a retrial.

Appeals

Southworth v. Commonwealth, 435 S.W.3d 32 (2014)

Jun 19, 2014

OUTCOME: Reversed and remanded.

Donald Southworth was convicted of murdering his wife, Umi Southworth, and was sentenced to life in prison. He raises numerous issues on appeal, including that he was entitled to a directed verdict a ... nd that the trial court admitted evidence of other acts in violation of KRE 404(b). While Southworth was not entitled to a directed verdict of acquittal, and therefore may be retried, the admission of the other-acts evidence was in error and prejudiced Southworth. For that reason, his conviction is reversed.

Appeals

Brann v. Commonwealth, 2014-SC-00477 remand 2012-CA-001656-MR To be Published

Aug 21, 2012

OUTCOME: Vacated and remanded.

This case is again before this Court upon remand from the Supreme Court of Kentucky for further consideration in light of its decision in Commonwealth v. Andrews, 448 S.W.3d 773 (Ky. 2014). Initially ... this Court vacated and remanded the case for further consideration by the trial court of the applicability of Kentucky Revised Statutes (KRS) 439.3106. However, the Supreme Court granted discretionary review and in the meantime rendered Andrews, supra. After reviewing Andrews, we again vacate and remand for the trial court’s consideration under KRS 439.3106.

Jason Apollo Hart's Legal Cases (5)

Tapp v. Commonwealth, 2014-SC-000607-DG To be published

Muchrison v. Commonwealth, 2014-CA-001375-MR To be published

Martin v. Commonwealth, 2013-SC-000519-MR To be published

Southworth v. Commonwealth, 435 S.W.3d 32 (2014)

Brann v. Commonwealth, 2014-SC-00477 remand 2012-CA-001656-MR To be Published