Daniel C. Clark, Appellant v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, Appellee

Summary

The court reversed Clark's convictions because the trial court improperly failed to instruct the jury on second-degree sexual abuse as to L.H., whose abuse could have occurred both before and after his twelfth birthday, and improperly admitted evidence of Clark's prior sexual misconduct. The court affirmed the exclusion of videotaped interviews because the tapes were not included in the appellate record, preventing review of their admissibility or prejudice. Justice Scott, dissenting, would have affirmed the jury-instruction and prior-misconduct rulings because the offenses were not mutually exclusive and the evidence showed a sufficiently distinctive pattern.