MITCHELL THACKER v. COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
RENDERED: September 25, 1998; 10:00 a.m.
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED
C ommonwealth O f K entucky
C ourt O f A ppeals
No.
1997-CA-000790-MR
MITCHELL THACKER
v.
APPELLANT
APPEAL FROM PIKE CIRCUIT COURT
HONORABLE EDDY COLEMAN, JUDGE
ACTION NO. 95-CR-0003
COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY
APPELLEE
OPINION
AFFIRMING
* * * * * * * *
BEFORE:
BUCKINGHAM, EMBERTON and GUIDUGLI, Judges.
EMBERTON, JUDGE.
Mitchell Thacker appeals from an order
revoking his probation and sentencing him to a period of two
years incarceration.
The Commonwealth moved to revoke the appellant’s
probation for the use of marijuana on February 16, 1996, March
21, 1996, August 21, 1996, December 4, 1996, January 8, 1997, and
February 5, 1997.
A hearing was held on March 7, 1997.
The
Commonwealth’s proof consisted of the probation and parole
officer’s testimony relating to the results of drug screen tests
conducted by Smith, Kline & Beecham Laboratory in Lexington,
Kentucky.
Appellant objected to the reports as evidence on the
basis that there was no representative from the laboratory to
testify or otherwise authenticate the documents.
Probation revocation hearings are informal procedures
and a defendant is not entitled to the same due process
consideration as he is in a criminal trial.
Hearsay testimony,
although inadmissible at a criminal trial, is admissible
especially where, as here, trained personnel are available to
testify.
Marshall v. Commonwealth, Ky. App., 638 S.W.2d 288, 289
(1982).
The determinative question is whether the reliability of
the hearsay can be ascertained.
Id.
The report issued by the
laboratory established the internal chain of custody of the
specimens and the tests administered.
The trial court was
permitted to rely on its knowledge of Smith, Kline & Beecham as a
reliable laboratory.
We find no error in the admission of the
drug screen test results.
A review of the record reveals that appellant was given
ample notice of the grounds for the revocation hearing.
Rasdon
v. Commonwealth, Ky., 701 S.W.2d 716 (1986).
The order of the Pike Circuit Court is affirmed.
ALL CONCUR.
BRIEF FOR APPELLANT:
BRIEF FOR APPELLEE:
W. Sidney Trivette
Pikeville, Kentucky
A. B. Chandler III
Attorney General
Gregory C. Fuchs
Assistant Attorney General
Frankfort, Kentucky
-2-
-3-
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
