Phillip Lanham, Appellant v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, Appellee

Summary

The Kentucky Supreme Court affirmed Lanham's convictions for murdering his wife and tampering with physical evidence. It held that the detective's accusatory interrogation comments were admissible to provide context for Lanham's changing responses, but that a limiting admonition was required if requested and Lanham failed to preserve that omission. The court further held that only two diary-entry objections and the crying-family issue were preserved, and that the preserved evidentiary errors were not prejudicial. Cooper, dissenting, would have reversed because the interrogation recording improperly conveyed the detective's opinions and most diary entries were inadmissible character or irrelevant state-of-mind evidence.