Rosen v. Watson

Summary

The Supreme Court of Kentucky affirmed a writ of prohibition barring prosecution of Joseph Watson for second-degree escape. The court held that a request under KRS 500.110 was properly filed in the district court where the detainer charge was pending and was not premature merely because the request preceded the grand jury indictment. The court declined to construe KRS 500.110 identically to the Interstate Agreement on Detainers.

Holdings

1. A prisoner satisfies KRS 500.110 by delivering the request for final disposition to the court in which the detainer charge was pending when the detainer was lodged and to the prosecuting officer responsible for that charge. The prisoner is not required to refile the request in circuit court after a subsequent grand jury indictment transfers the case.
2. A request for final disposition under KRS 500.110 is not premature when filed after a detainer has been lodged but before indictment; the filing of the detainer, rather than the issuance of an indictment, triggers the statute.
3. KRS 500.110 and the Interstate Agreement on Detainers are similar but not identical statutes, and courts may not engraft the IAD's circuit-court definition of appropriate court onto KRS 500.110.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a prisoner satisfies KRS 500.110 by delivering a request for final disposition to the court in which the detainer charge was pending when the detainer was lodged, even though the charge is later transferred to circuit court by indictment.
2. Whether a request for final disposition under KRS 500.110 is premature when filed after a detainer is lodged but before a grand jury indictment is issued.
3. Whether KRS 500.110 must be construed identically to the Interstate Agreement on Detainers, including its definition of appropriate court.

Disposition

affirmed