## Facts

- In 2016, Jack (also reported as Jackie) Morgan hosted organized cockfighting derbies on his rural property in Kentucky.
- The events involved structured matches, entry fees, and gambling; roosters were fitted with metal “gaffs” or knives and fought to severe injury or death.
- The Commonwealth investigated and charged Morgan with several offenses, including promoting gambling, conspiracy, engaging in organized crime, possession of gambling records, and second-degree cruelty to animals based on cockfighting.
- Morgan moved to dismiss the second-degree cruelty to animals count, arguing Kentucky’s general definitional statute excluded “birds” from the definition of “animal,” so cockfighting could not satisfy the elements of animal-cruelty offenses.
- The Laurel Circuit Court denied the motion to dismiss.
- Morgan entered a conditional guilty plea to promoting gambling and second-degree cruelty to animals, reserving the right to appeal the legal issue whether the cruelty statute could apply to cockfighting given the “birds” exclusion.
- Morgan appealed to the Kentucky Court of Appeals on the preserved statutory-interpretation issue.

## Issues

1. Whether Kentucky’s second-degree cruelty to animals statute permits prosecution for cockfighting notwithstanding a general statutory definition of “animal” that excludes birds.
2. Whether, when a general definition conflicts with later-enacted or more specific provisions targeting animal fighting ventures, the specific statutory scheme controls.

## Decision

- The Kentucky Court of Appeals affirmed the denial of Morgan’s motion to dismiss and upheld the second-degree cruelty to animals conviction entered on the conditional guilty plea.
- The court held cockfighting may be prosecuted as “cruelty to animals” under Kentucky law despite the general definitional exclusion of birds.
- The court read the cruelty-to-animals provisions together with the more specific anti-animal-fighting provisions to effectuate legislative intent to criminalize organized animal fighting, including cockfighting.

## Legal Principles

- Statutes are construed as a whole, and courts seek a reading that gives effect to the overall statutory scheme rather than allowing one provision to nullify another.
- Specific provisions directed to a particular subject matter control over more general definitional or background provisions when they conflict.
- Courts may reject a construction that would yield an absurd or clearly unintended result, particularly where it would undermine enforcement of targeted criminal prohibitions.
- Legislative intent is inferred from statutory structure, related provisions, and amendments indicating the conduct the legislature sought to prohibit.

## Conclusion

The Kentucky Court of Appeals concluded that Kentucky’s statutory scheme reflects a legislative decision to criminalize cockfighting and that the general exclusion of birds from a definitional provision does not bar a second-degree cruelty to animals prosecution for organized cockfighting.


Morgan v. Commonwealth, No. 2018-CA-001682-MR, 2019 WL 2896651 (Ky. Ct. App. July 5, 2019)