Request By:
Mr. Kendall Robinson
Attorney at Law
Booneville, Kentucky 41314
Opinion
Opinion By: Robert F. Stephens, Attorney General; By: Robert L. Chenoweth, Assistant Attorney General
You have asked the Office of the Attorney General for an opinion as to what court has jurisdiction to try offenses committed by adults under KRS 530.060 and 530.070. You question the "Commentary (1974)" statement following KRS 530.060 which provides that there is no exclusive jurisdiction granted to the county court under this statute. Your basis for such apprehension is the specific language of KRS 208.020(3) which reads:
"(3) The court of each county shall have exclusive jurisdiction of persons charged with violations of KRS 530.060 and 530.070." (Emphasis ours.)
KRS 208.020 speaks to the jurisdiction of the juvenile court. Moreover, it should be noted that KRS 208.010(3) reads:
"As used in KRS 208.010 to 208.540, and 208.990, unless the context otherwise requires:
(3) 'Court' means the juvenile session of the county court;"
Also, that the 1976 General Assembly added to KRS 208.020 the subsection now designated (6) which reads:
"(6) Any person over whom the court has jurisdiction under subsections (3), (4) or (5) of this section, shall be entitled to a trial by jury."
Thus, anyone charged with violating KRS 530.060 or 530.070 is entitled to a trial by jury in the juvenile session of the county court.
As is fairly obvious from the above, it is our position that the juvenile court of each county has exclusive jurisdiction alone to consider KRS 530.060 or 530.070 charges. The Kentucky Court of Appeals recently stated:
"It is a reaffirmed principle of this Court that the strict wording of a statute shall be considered to ascertain the purpose of that statute." Kavanaugh v. Daniels, Ky., App., 549 S.W.2d 526, 528 (1977).
We believe it is very difficult to quibble with the word "exclusive" used in KRS 208.020(3). It is our opinion the "Commentary (1974)" statement to the contrary is incorrect and is of absolutely no consequence. For another opinion relative to the incorrectness of the "Commentary (1974)" under KRS 530.060 , see OAG 77-520, copy attached.