Court of Criminal Appeals Opinions - 4^th Quarter 2000

The following Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals Opinions are available for download:

---

Cases Posted the Week of (12/25/2000)
State vs. Toscar C. Carpenter, Sr. - M2000-0990-CCA-R3-CD View
The appellant, Toscar C. Carpenter, Sr., pursuant to a bench trial, was convicted of one count of theft over $1000, a class D felony. The trial court sentenced the appellant as a career offender to twelve years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The appellant presents the following issue for our review: whether, considering the inconsistency and nature of the testimony of the prosecution's witnesses, there was sufficient evidence to convict the appellant of theft over $1000. Based upon a review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. ThomasLawrence and Joseph Hatton - M2000-00493-CCA-R3-CD View
The appellant, Thomas Lawrence, was convicted by a jury in the Marshall County Criminal Court of one count of possession of cocaine with intent to sell, a class C felony, and one count of possession of drug paraphernalia, a class A misdemeanor. The trial court sentenced Lawrence, as a Range II offender, to eight years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction for the possession of crack cocaine conviction and assessed a $2000 fine. The trial court further sentenced Lawrence to eleven months incarceration in the Marshall County Jail for the possession of drug paraphernalia conviction. The trial court ordered Lawrence to serve these sentences concurrently. The appellant, Joseph Hatton, was convicted by a jury in the Marshall County Criminal Court of two counts of selling crack cocaine, a class C felony, one count of possession of crack cocaine with the intent to sell, a class C felony, and one count of possession of drug paraphernalia, a class A misdemeanor. The trial court sentenced Hatton, as a Range I offender, to four years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction for each sale of crack cocaine conviction and four years incarceration for the possession of crack cocaine with the intent to sell conviction. The court assessed a total of $4250 in fines. The trial court further ordered Hatton to serve his sentences for selling crack cocaine concurrently with each other but consecutive to the sentence for possession of crack cocaine with the intent to sell.

State vs. Anthony Layne - N1997-00025-CCA-R3-CD View
The appellant, Anthony Layne, was convicted by a jury in the Coffee County Circuit Court of one count of criminal trespass, a class C misdemeanor, and one count of theft of property less than $500, a class A misdemeanor. The trial court sentenced the appellant to thirty days incarceration in the Coffee County Jail for the criminal trespass conviction. The trial court also sentenced the appellant to eleven months and twenty-nine days incarceration in the Coffee County Jail for the theft conviction and assessed a $1000 fine. The appellant raises the following issue for our review: whether the evidence in this case was sufficient to support the appellant's convictions. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Gregory Lynn Redden - M2000-00761-CCA-R3-CD View
The appellant, Gregory Lynn Redden, pled guilty in the Williamson County Circuit Court to one count of burglary, a class D felony. The trial court sentenced the appellant as a Range III persistent offender to eleven years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The trial court further ordered the appellant to serve this sentence consecutively to the appellant's unserved sentences imposed in Greene County, Missouri, in the United States District Court in the Northern District of Ohio, and in Robertson County, Tennessee. The appellant raises the following issue for our review: whether the trial court erred in ordering the appellant to serve his sentence in this case consecutively to his other sentences. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Amelia Kay Stem - M2000-00600-CCA-R3-CD View
The appellant, Amelia Kay Stem, entered a plea of nolo contendere in the Lawrence County Circuit Court to one count of second degree murder. The trial court sentenced the appellant to twenty-five years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The appellant raises the following issue(s) for our review: whether the trial court erred in sentencing the appellant by incorrectly applying enhancement factors, by failing to apply mitigating factors, and by neglecting to make specific findings of fact on the record. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Mark E. Oliver vs. State - M1999-02323-CCA-R3-PC View
The petitioner, Mark E. Oliver, appeals as of right from the dismissal of his petition for writ of habeas corpus. He contends that his original sentence of sixty years as a Range II offender for the offense of second degree murder is an illegal sentence because the trial court was without jurisdiction to sentence him under the Criminal Sentencing Reform Act of 1982. We hold that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to sentence the petitioner under the 1982 Act; therefore, the sentence imposed is an illegal sentence. We remand this case to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

William Floyd vs. State - M2000-00318-CCA-R3-CD View
William Floyd appeals the dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. In 1998, Floyd pled guilty to two counts of rape and, under the terms of his plea agreement, was sentenced to twenty years imprisonment. In his petition for post-conviction relief, Floyd contends that his guilty pleas are involuntary because on the date his pleas were entered he was under the influence of prescribed psychotropic drugs. The petition was dismissed by the post-conviction court and this appeal follows. Finding that the evidence in the record does not support Floyd's claim, we affirm the lower court's dismissal.

State vs. Stephen T. Mays a/k/a Stephen T. Mayes - M2000-00602-CCA-R3-CD View
The Appellant, Stephen T. Mays, pled guilty to two counts of theft of property over $10,000 and received two concurrent five-year sentences. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court imposed split confinement sentences and ordered the Appellant to serve a ninety-day period of confinement. The court also ordered restitution with scheduled payments over a ten-year period. On appeal, the Appellant argues (1) that the trial court erred in failing to grant the Appellant's request for total probation; and (2) that the trial court improperly established restitution. After review, the judgment of the Davidson County Criminal Court is affirmed.

State vs. Gregory Lynn Redden - M2000-00988-CCA-R3-CD View
The Appellant, Gregory Lynn Redden, was convicted by a Robertson County jury of burglary, theft of property over $1,000, and criminal impersonation. He received concurrent sentences of twelve years for burglary, twelve years for theft of property, and six months for criminal impersonation. On appeal, the Appellant raises the following three issues for our review: (1) whether the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict; (2) whether the trial court erred in not excusing two jurors for cause during voir dire; and (3) whether the trial court erred by allowing the statement of the Appellant's confession into evidence. After review, we find no error and affirm the judgment.

State vs. Beverly K. Meeks - M2000-00435-CCA-MR3-CD View
The Defendant, Beverly K. Meeks, entered best interest guilty pleas to charges of child neglect, a Class D felony, and resisting arrest, a Class B misdemeanor. She received agreed sentences of three years for child neglect and three months for resisting arrest, with the sentences to be served concurrently. The manner of service of those sentences was to be determined by the trial court. After a sentencing hearing, the trial court ordered the Defendant to serve her sentences in confinement. In this appeal as of right, the Defendant argues that the trial court erred by denying her an alternative sentence. She asserts that she should have been placed on community corrections. We find no error; accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

State vs. Mark A. Scarborough - M2000-1359-CCA-R3-CD View
Mark A. Scarborough appeals the sentencing decision of the Hickman County Circuit Court following his jury conviction of driving under the influence. The issue of enhanced punishment as a prior DUI offender was submitted to the trial court. The court found the Appellant guilty of DUI, third offense, and sentenced him to eleven months, twenty-nine days with 180 days to be served in confinement followed by six months probation. At the motion for new trial, the trial court modified its prior ruling and reduced the Appellant's conviction to DUI, second offense. The Appellant's 180-day period of confinement was not modified. On appeal, the Appellant argues that the trial court erred in failing to reduce his sentence after it reduced his conviction from DUI, third offense, to DUI, second offense. Because the record is incomplete for review, we afford the sentence imposed by the trial court the presumption of correctness. Accordingly, we affirm.

State vs. Zane Allen Davis, Jr. - M2000-00737-CCA-R3-CD View
Defendant Zane Allen Davis was found guilty by a Williamson County jury of violating Tenn. Code Ann. §55-10-401(a)(2), driving a vehicle while the alcohol concentration in the driver's blood or breath was ten-hundredths of one percent (0.10%) or more, a Class A misdemeanor. The trial court sentenced Defendant to eleven months and twenty-nine days, with the sentence suspended after Defendant served thirty days in the County Jail, and a $1250 fine. Defendant raises the following issues in his appeal: (1) whether the trial court erred when it ruled that the State was not required under Tenn. R. Crim. P. 16 to provide Defendant with documentation pertaining to the reliability of his blood alcohol test results; (2) whether the trial court erred when it quashed Defendant's subpoena duces tecum requesting the State's expert to bring documentation, previously ruled undiscoverable under Tenn. R. Crim. P. 16, to trial; (3) whether the trial court erred by allowing the State's expert witness to testify without first laying the proper foundation; and (4) whether the trial court erred when it limited Defendant's proof at trial regarding the arresting officer's motive. After a review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Amos Phillips - E1999-02776-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant, Amos Phillips, was convicted of the sale of less than .5 grams of cocaine, see Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-417. The trial court imposed a Range II sentence of nine years in the Department of Correction. In this appeal as of right, the defendant contends that the evidence is insufficient and that the trial court erred by allowing the jury, after it had begun deliberations, to review the testimony of state witness Detective David Street. Because the evidence is sufficient to support the conviction and the trial court did not err by granting the jury's request to rehear Detective Street's testimony, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Ronald E. Walton vs. State - E1999-01165-CCA-R3-PC View
After a hearing, the petitioner appeals the criminal court's order dismissing his petition for post-conviction relief. Convicted in 1968 of assault and battery with intent to rape, the petitioner was sentenced to incarceration for ten years. The petitioner has fully served his sentence in Tennessee. However, his Tennessee conviction was used to enhance his 1980 conviction of rape in Indiana. The petitioner proceeds to challenge his Tennessee conviction, in hope of a sentence reduction in Indiana. After careful review, we affirm the criminal court's dismissal.

Joseph Lebron Derrick vs. State - E1999-02646-CCA-R3-PC View
The Defendant was convicted by a Hamilton County jury of second degree murder and was sentenced to twenty-years incarceration. On direct appeal, this Court affirmed his conviction and sentence, and the Tennessee Supreme Court denied permission to appeal. The Defendant subsequently filed a post-conviction petition, alleging that he was denied his right to effective assistance of counsel and his right to a fair trial. The post-conviction court denied post-conviction relief. We conclude that the Defendant was denied neither his right to effective assistance of counsel at trial nor his right to a fair trial. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of trial court denying post-conviction relief.

State vs. Cornelius Michael Hyde - E2000-00042-CCA-R3-CD View
State vs. Cornelius Michael Hyde - E2000-00042-CCA-R3-CD (Concur/Dissent) View
State vs. Cornelius Michael Hyde - E2000-00042-CCA-R3-CD (Concur) View
The Defendant appeals as of right from his conviction of aggravated child abuse. After being found guilty of aggravated child abuse by a jury, the Defendant was sentenced to twenty-one years. On appeal, he raises the following eight issues: (1) whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain his conviction; (2) whether the trial court erred by not requiring the State to respond to his Motion for a Bill of Particulars; (3) whether the trial court erred by admitting photographs of the victim's injuries and by allowing the photographs to be projected to the jury throughout the trial; (4) whether the trial court erred by not allowing the Defendant to cross-examine the State's expert concerning examples of serious bodily injury; (5) whether the trial court erred by not including the statutory definition of "injury" in the child abuse instruction, but including it in the aggravated child abuse instruction; (6) whether the trial court erred by not charging the jury with the lesser included offenses of assault and aggravated assault; (7) whether the trial court erred by not properly redacting the victim's medical report so as to eliminate a reference to the Defendant as the "chief suspect" in the case; and (8) whether the trial court erred by not redacting the Defendant's statement to eliminate the detective's use of the word "extremely" and by permitting unintelligible portions of the statement to be heard by the jury. We hold that the trial court erred by failing to instruct the jury on the lesser included offenses of aggravated assault and assault, but that such error was harmless. We find no other error; accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court

State vs. Bobby Haley - W2000-00860-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant pled guilty to delivery of less than one-half gram of a Schedule II, controlled substance, and the trial court sentenced him as a Range III, persistent offender to twelve years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the defendant contends that his sentence is excessive. We affirm the sentence imposed by the trial court.

State vs. Jimmy Harber Jr. - W2000-00462-CCA-R3-CD View
While driving under the influence of alcohol, the defendant lost control of his pickup truck and crashed into a road embankment, causing the death of one of his five teenaged passengers. He pled guilty to vehicular homicide by intoxication as to the passenger who died, and to reckless endangerment with a deadly weapon as to all other passengers, agreeing to allow the trial court to set his sentences. Applying enhancement factors (10) and (16), the trial court sentenced the defendant as a Range I, standard offender to ten years for the vehicular homicide conviction, and two years for the reckless endangerment conviction, with the sentences to be served concurrently. The defendant appeals the sentencing, arguing that the trial court erred in its application of enhancement and mitigating factors, and that he should have been granted probation. Based upon our review of the record and of applicable law, we conclude that the enhanced sentences are supported by the record, and that the trial court, therefore, committed no error in its failure to grant probation. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Demario Jackson - W2000-01421-CCA-R3-PC View
The Defendant pleaded guilty to two counts of rape of a child. Pursuant to a plea agreement, he was sentenced to two concurrent prison terms of fifteen years, to be served at one hundred percent. The Defendant complains in this post-conviction proceeding that he received ineffective assistance of counsel in conjunction with his plea, resulting in a plea that was not knowingly, intelligently or voluntarily entered. The trial court denied relief. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Michael Knox - W2000-00362-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant pled guilty to vehicular homicide by intoxication, a Class B felony, and was sentenced as a Range I, standard offender to: eight years imprisonment; a $10,000 fine; and state probation, to be served upon his release from prison, with the condition that he perform five hundred hours of community service. In this appeal as of right, the defendant argues that the trial court erred in denying his request for alternative sentencing. After review, we conclude that the record supports the sentence of incarceration, but that the trial court erred in ordering that the defendant be placed on probation and required to perform community service upon the completion of his prison sentence. Accordingly, we affirm the portion of the judgment ordering an eight-year sentence of incarceration and a fine of $10,000, but reverse the portion ordering that the defendant be placed on probation following his release and that he perform community service. In addition, we order that the defendant be prohibited from operating a motor vehicle for a period of five years from the entry of an order prohibiting such.

---

Cases Posted the Week of (12/18/2000)
State vs. Lester Parker - E2000-00282-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant appeals from a jury trial conviction for criminal attempt to possess Schedule II controlled substance with intent to deliver. In the appeal, the defendant alleges that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury's verdict, the trial court erred in allowing a positive drug test of the defendant to be admitted into evidence, and the trial court erred in denying the defendant's motion to remand the case to the General Sessions Court for a preliminary hearing. We conclude that the issues presented for appeal are without merit and affirm the trial court.

Wardell Lewis vs. State - E2000-01735-CCA-R3-CD View
The petitioner appeals the dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. The trial court dismissed the petition because it was not filed within one year of the date on which the judgments became final. We affirm the trial court.

State vs. Clarence Braddock Jr. - W2000-00383-CCA-R3-CD View
The Defendant, Clarence Braddock, Jr., entered a guilty plea to the offense of introduction of contraband into a penal institution, a Class C felony. After a sentencing hearing, he was denied alternative sentencing and was sentenced to three years incarceration. In this appeal as of right, the Defendant asserts that the trial court erred by denying him alternative sentencing. We hold that the Defendant was properly denied alternative sentencing; thus, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. James Cole - W2000-00056-CCA-R3-CD View
The Defendant, James L. Cole, appeals as of right from his first degree felony murder conviction. On appeal, he asserts that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction. We hold that the evidence was sufficient to support the Defendant's conviction; accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Robbie Carriger - E2000-00823-CCA-R3-CD View
The state challenges the trial court's order placing the defendant, Robbie Carriger, on pretrial diversion based upon its finding that the prosecutor abused his discretion for failing to consider all the factors relevant to pretrial diversion in his written response denying diversion. The state contends that the trial court erred in refusing to consider the prosecutor's amended response to the application for pretrial diversion. We hold that the trial court properly refused to consider the prosecutor's amended response, but we reverse the trial court's automatic grant of pretrial diversion and remand the case for the trial court to consider the defendant's entitlement to pretrial diversion in light of the relevant factors.

State sv. Marcus Anthony Parram - E2000-00581-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant appeals his convictions for aggravated robbery and aggravated burglary, contending that the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions, that the trial court erred in allowing hearsay statements into evidence, and that the trial court erred in allowing evidence of a prior robbery committed by the defendant. We affirm the judgments of the trial court.

State vs. Vance Shelton - E2000-01632-CCA-R3-CD View
Defendant was convicted of rape of a child and aggravated sexual battery. The defendant was sentenced to twenty-five years for rape of a child and twelve years for aggravated sexual battery, to run consecutively to each other and consecutively to a prior four-year sentence. In this appeal, the defendant makes the following allegations: (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions; (2) the trial court erred in failing to grant a mistrial due to a variance between the indictment and the state's proof at trial; (3) the trial court erred in ruling his prior convictions for arson would be admissible if he testified; and (4) his sentences are excessive. Upon our review of the record, we remand for modification of the judgment for aggravated sexual battery to reflect the proper date of the offense, but affirm the judgments in all other respects.

State vs. Gary Anthony Burns - E1999-02610-CCA-R3-CD View
The Defendant, Gary Anthony Burns, pleaded guilty to two counts of theft over $500.00. The trial court sentenced the Defendant as a Range I standard offender to two years on each theft count and ordered the sentences to be served concurrently. The trial court then suspended the two-year sentence and ordered the Defendant to be placed on six years probation after service of ninety days in the Sullivan County jail, day for day. The Defendant now appeals, arguing that the trial court unlawfully denied him alternative sentencing. We conclude that the Defendant's sentence is proper and therefore affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. John D. Brown - E1999-02217-CCA-R3-CD View
State vs. John D. Brown - E1999-02217-CCA-R3-CD (Concur/Dissent) View
The Defendant, John D. Brown, appeals as of right from his McMinn County convictions for first degree murder and abuse of a corpse. On appeal, he raises nine issues: (1) whether the trial court failed to properly function as the thirteenth juror in considering the Defendant's motion for judgment of acquittal and a new trial; (2) whether the Honorable Steven Bebb erred by failing to recuse himself upon the grounds that under Tennessee Code Annotated section 17-1-305, only the Honorable Carroll Ross, the successor in office to the late Judge Mayo L. Mashburn, could rule on the Defendant's motion for a new trial; (3) whether the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict and whether the evidence was sufficient to establish that the offense was committed prior to the return of the formal charge; (4) whether the trial court erred by failing to grant the Defendant's special jury instruction request; (5) whether the trial court erred by not allowing into evidence the testimony of Frank Hammonds, Polk County General Sessions Judge; (6) whether the trial court erred by not allowing into evidence the medical records pertaining to the treatment of Danny Jones at the Athens Regional Medical Center; (7) whether the trial court erred by failing to grant a mistrial after T.J. Jordan, a witness for the State, volunteered information to the jury that a certain four-wheel land vehicle found on the Defendant's property was "stolen"; (8) whether the trial court erred by overruling the Defendant's motion to dismiss criminal charges for violating the "anti-shuttling provisions" of the Interstate Agreement on Detainers Act; and (9) whether the trial court erred by ordering the Defendant's sentence for murder to run consecutive to his life sentence in the federal penitentiary. We hold that the Defendant's convictions must be reversed and the case remanded for a new trial because the trial judge failed to properly function as the thirteenth juror and because the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the offenses were committed prior to the return of the formal charge.

State vs. Gene Logue - W1999-01795-CCA-R3-CD View
Defendant was convicted of theft of property over $500.00, and sentenced to two (2) years as a Range I standard offender. Defendant now appeals as of right, and raises the following issues: the evidence is insufficient to sustain his conviction, the court erred in failing to grant his motion for judgment of acquittal because the state failed to prove the value of the property stolen and the venue of the crime in Benton County, and the court erred in sentencing defendant to serve two (2) years and failing to consider alternative sentencing. We affirm the decision of the trial court.

State vs. Billy Thompson - W1999-01001-CCA-R3-CD View
In 1995, Billy Thompson, a Mississippi resident, was convicted in Shelby County of driving under the influence, resulting in suspension of his driving privileges in this state for one year. Fifteen months later, Thompson was again charged and convicted of driving under the influence, sixth offense, reckless driving and driving while revoked, being the instant offenses before this court. On the date of the latter offenses, Thompson possessed a valid Mississippi driver's license, however, he had not complied with the statutory requirements for reinstatement of his driving privileges in this state. Thompson appeals his convictions contending the trial court erred (1) by failing to sever the charge of driving while license revoked from the remaining counts and (2) by failing to grant his motion for judgment of acquittal as to the charge of driving while license revoked. We conclude that all charges were properly joined pursuant to Tenn. R. Crim. P. 8(a). Moreover, we hold that a nonresident motorist, although possessing a valid out-of-state license, may not operate a motor vehicle in this state following this state's revocation of his driving privileges until the motorist complies with Tennessee's reinstatement procedures. Because we find the proof sufficient to support the challenged conviction, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

State s. Ricky Eugene Cofer - E2000-00532-CCA-R3-CD View
Defendant was indicted for aggravated robbery, and a Roane County jury found him guilty of the lesser offense of simple robbery, a Class C felony. The trial court sentenced him to six years as a Range II, multiple offender, to be served consecutively to a prior Anderson County sentence. In this appeal, defendant makes the following allegations: (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction; (2) the jury foreman impermissibly interjected extraneous information into the jury deliberations; and (3) consecutive sentences were not warranted. Upon our review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Nicholas Robert Brown - E1999-00110-CCA-R3-CD View
The Defendant, Nicholas Roberts Brown, pleaded guilty to one count of statutory rape. Pursuant to his plea agreement, he received a sentence of one year, with the manner of service of the sentence to be determined by the trial court. After a sentencing hearing, the Defendant was ordered to serve sixty days in jail, with the remainder of his sentence to be served in community corrections. In this appeal as of right, the Defendant argues that he should have been placed on immediate probation. We hold that the Defendant failed to establish his suitability for full probation, but we modify the his sentence to sixty days incarceration followed by supervised probation because the Defendant is statutorily ineligible to participate in the community corrections program. The case is remanded for the trial court to determine the conditions of probation.

State vs. Terry Johnson - W2000-00749-CCA-R3-CD View
A Lauderdale County jury convicted the defendant of felony reckless endangerment, and in this appeal, the defendant claims two errors: (1) The trial court erroneously determined that the eight-year-old victim was competent to testify, and (2) the defendant was denied his right to a unanimous verdict. We find no error requiring reversal and affirm the conviction.

State vs. Alexander Lee - W1999-01804-CCA-R3-CD View
The Appellant, Alexander A. Lee, pled guilty to one count of felony possession of cocaine, a class C felony. The Shelby County Criminal Court sentenced the Appellant to three years, suspended, with nine months to serve in the county workhouse. On appeal, the Appellant contends that the trial judge erred in denying his request for total probation. After review, we find no error. Therefore, the judgment is affirmed.

State vs. John Lee Dockery - E2000-00753-CCA-R3-CD View
The Defendant, John Lee Dockery, was convicted after a bench trial of fourth offense driving under the influence (DUI) and driving on a revoked license. In this appeal as of right, the Defendant argues that the trial court erred by admitting into evidence statements the Defendant made to the arresting officer before Miranda warnings were given and that the evidence was insufficient to support the DUI conviction. We conclude that the statements made by the Defendant were properly admitted and that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

State vs. Treva Dianne Green - E1999-02204-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant appeals from her Blount County Circuit Court conviction and sentence for driving under the influence, a Class A misdemeanor. The trial court sentenced the defendant to eleven months and 29 days in the Blount County Jail, all of which was suspended except for service of eight days incarceration. The jury imposed a fine of $1,500. In this direct appeal, the defendant complains that the evidence is insufficient to support her conviction, that statements she made to the arresting officer should have been suppressed, that prosecutorial misconduct taints the verdict, that the jury should have been charged on reckless driving as a lesser-included offense, and that her sentence and fine are excessive. We affirm the judgment of the trial court, as modified.

State vs. Randal L. Cheek - M2000-00203-CCA-R3-CD View
This appeal presents review of a certified question of law following the Appellant's guilty pleas to possession of marijuana with intent to sell and possession of drug paraphernalia. Pursuant to his negotiated plea agreement, the court imposed an effective sentence of one and one-half years, suspended after five days confinement followed by two years probation. Also, as part of the plea agreement, the Appellant explicitly reserved, with the consent of the trial court and the State, a certified question of law challenging the court's denial of the Appellant's motion to suppress. On appeal, the State contends that (1) the certified question of law is not contained in the final judgments nor is it incorporated by reference and (2) the question is not clearly stated so as to identify the scope and limits of the legal issue. After review, we find that the question of law presented fails to identify with sufficient clarity the scope and boundaries of the issue reserved. Accordingly, the appeal is hereby dismissed and this case is remanded to the trial court.

State vs. Arnold Jones - M1999-00851-CCA-R3-CD View
The appellant, Arnold L. Jones, was convicted in the Williamson County Circuit Court, pursuant to a bench trial, of one count of failure to appear in court, a class E felony. Subsequently, a jury in the Williamson County Circuit Court convicted the appellant of one count of introducing drugs into a penal institution, a class C felony, and one count of delivery of over .5 grams of cocaine, a class B felony. The trial court sentenced the appellant, as a Range II offender, to eight years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction for introduction of drugs into a penal institution. The trial court also sentenced the appellant, as a Range II offender, to fifteen years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction for delivery of over .5 grams of cocaine, and assessed a fine of $10,000. The trial court further ordered that these sentences be served concurrently. Additionally, the trial court sentenced the appellant to three years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction for failure to appear in court, and ordered this sentence to be served consecutively to the other sentences for the drug convictions. The appellant raises the following issues for our review: (1) whether the evidence presented at trial was sufficient to support a finding by a rational trier of fact that the appellant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt; and (2) whether the trial court erred in imposing excessive sentences. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Jerry W. Yancey, Jr. - M1999-02131-CCA-R3-CD View
The appellant/defendant, Jerry W. Yancey, Jr., was convicted by the Williamson County Jury on four counts, two counts of aggravated assault and two counts of felony reckless endangerment. In count five, the defendant was found not guilty of felony reckless endangerment. Upon the defendant's conviction for aggravated assault, the trial court imposed sentences of three and one-half (3-½) years in the Department of Correction. However, the trial court placed the defendant on probation for four (4) years with certain special conditions, mainly that the defendant serve sixty (60) days, day for day, in the Williamson County Jail. In his appeal, the defendant challenges: (1) Whether the trial court erred in finding that the District Attorney General did not abuse his discretion in denying the defendant pre-trial diversion?; and (2) Whether the trial court erred in denying the defendant full probation? Upon our review of the entire record, we find no reversible error and affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Arnold K. Ward - M1999-00357-CCA-R3-CD View
The appellant/defendant, Arnold K. Ward, Jr., appeals as of right from a judgment of conviction and sentencing imposed by the Williamson County Circuit Court. Upon jury conviction for attempted murder second degree and assault, the trial court imposed sentences of eleven (11) years for attempted murder second degree and eleven (11) months and twenty-nine (29) days for assault. The trial court ordered the sentences to be served concurrently. In his appellate issues, the defendant asserts that: (1) the indictment for count one is defective; (2) the defendant was denied his right to compulsory process; (3) extra-judicial communication during the trial between a witness and a juror contaminated the proceedings; (4) there was insufficient evidence for which a rational trier of fact could find the defendant guilty; (5) the defendant was convicted of a charge that does not exist under Tennessee law; and (6) the defendant's sentence is excessive. After a review of the entire record, we find the appellate issues without merit and affirm the trial court's judgment.

State vs. Bobby Barrett - W1999-02002-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant was convicted in the Shelby County Criminal Court of rape of a child. In this appeal as of right, the defendant presents two issues, one with subparts: (1) whether the trial court erred in admitting the following: (a) testimony of the sister of the victim concerning a prior bad act of the defendant; (b) testimony of the mother of the victim concerning statements made by the victim to her following the rape; and (c) testimony of the nurse practitioner concerning statements made to her by the victim and his mother; and (2) whether the evidence was sufficient to support his conviction. We conclude that the trial court erred in admitting the testimony of the victim's sister concerning the defendant's sitting her on his lap and asking for a kiss. Nevertheless, we conclude that such error was harmless. The testimony of the mother of the victim was properly admitted pursuant to the excited utterance exception to the hearsay rule. The defendant's failure to timely object to the testimony of the nurse practitioner constitutes a waiver of that issue. We further conclude that the evidence was sufficient to support the defendant's conviction for child rape. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

State vs. Clarence Currie - W1999-01813-CCA-R3-CD View
A jury found the defendant guilty of aggravated assault for shooting a coworker with a handgun during an altercation at their workplace. The trial court sentenced him to five years in the county workhouse, denying his request for probation. The defendant appeals his conviction and sentencing, arguing that the jury's verdict was not supported by the evidence, and that the trial court erred in sentencing him to five years imprisonment. Based upon our review, we conclude that the evidence at trial was sufficient to support the conviction, and that the nature and circumstances of the defendant's offense justifies the sentence imposed. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. James David Shropshire - E1998-00872-CCA-R3-CD View
In March 1996, James David Shropshire, the defendant and appellant, was convicted in the Knox County Criminal Court of aggravated sexual battery and simple assault. Following the jury's verdict, the trial court dismissed the simple assault charge. On appeal, the defendant challenges his conviction for aggravated sexual battery. He raises the following issues: (1) whether the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction; (2) whether a variance between the bill of particulars and the proof adduced at trial was fatal; (3) whether the defendant's conviction violated the double jeopardy clauses of the United States and Tennessee Constitutions; (4) whether the state made improper closing arguments; and (5) whether the trial court erred in allowing the state to introduce evidence that the defendant had committed prior bad acts. Because the jury heard evidence that the defendant committed a crime other than that for which he was on trial, which was the subject of an acquittal, the judgment of the trial court is reversed.

State vs. John Hampton - W1999-00983-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant, John Lee Hampton, who was charged with two counts of rape, was convicted of two counts of statutory rape. The trial court imposed two concurrent one-year sentences, with all but sixty days suspended. In this appeal as of right, the defendant asserts that the evidence was insufficient. He also argues that the trial court erred by admitting certain photographs into evidence, by rehabilitating a juror, by denying his motion in limine to exclude evidence of uncharged sexual offenses involving the victim, by permitting the victim to testify in rebuttal regarding an uncharged sexual offense, and by refusing to suspend his entire sentence. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Dewayne Jordan - W1999-01693-CCA-R3-CD View
The Defendant, Dewayne Jordan, was found guilty by a Shelby County jury of first degree premeditated murder of one victim, first degree felony murder of a second victim and aggravated robbery. The Defendant was sentenced to two consecutive life sentences for the murder convictions and to ten years imprisonment for the aggravated robbery conviction. The ten-year sentence was to be served concurrently with the two life sentences. The Defendant now appeals his convictions, raising the following issues: (1) whether there was sufficient evidence to convict the Defendant of first degree premeditated murder, first degree felony murder and aggravated robbery, (2) whether the trial court properly admitted the Defendant's statement into evidence, and (3) whether the trial court properly ordered that the Defendant's two life sentences be served consecutively. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Don Allen Rodgers - W2000-00714-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant appeals the trial court's revocation of his community corrections sentence and the imposition of incarceration in the Department of Correction. Finding no abuse of the trial court's discretion in making either determination, we affirm.

State vs. Joseph Tipler - W2000-00168-CCA-R3-PC View
The petitioner appeals the trial court's dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. The record supports the trial court's determination that the petitioner failed to establish his claims that he received ineffective assistance of counsel when trial counsel (1) failed to obtain a transcript of the preliminary hearing and (2) failed to move for a severance of offenses. Accordingly, we affirm.

State vs. William Terrell Hampton - E2000-00582-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant appeals his conviction for aggravated sexual battery, contending that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction, the trial court erred in admitting evidence of a fresh complaint, and the trial court erred in imposing a nine-year sentence. We affirm the defendant's conviction and sentence.

State vs. Chris A. Jefferson - E2000-00429-CCA-R3-CD View
Chris A. Jefferson appeals a certified question of law regarding a police officer's stop of him which resulted in his arrest for driving under the influence. Because we agree with the trial court that reasonable suspicion supported by specific and articulable facts existed for the stop, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Bruce Adams - E2000-00298-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant, Bruce Adams, appeals his convictions of resisting arrest and disorderly conduct and the manner of service of his effective six-month sentence. The trial court ordered ten days of confinement and probated the balance of the sentence. The resisting arrest conviction is supported by sufficient evidence, and we affirm that conviction and the sentence, including the confinement term. However, because we find insufficient evidence to support the disorderly conduct conviction, we reverse it and dismiss that charge.

---

Cases Posted the Week of (12/04/2000)
State vs. Michael G. Waldrum - M1999-01924-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant appeals his conviction for DUI, fourth offense, contesting the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction; the validity of his seizure and arrest; and the admissibility of the breath alcohol test result, the breath alcohol test operator's videotaped former testimony, and the breath alcohol test machine's certification documents. We conclude that the trial court erred in finding the breath test operator unavailable and that his videotaped testimony should not have been allowed. We reverse the judgment of conviction and remand the case for a new trial.

State vs. Jesse C. Goodman, Jr. - M1999-02132-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant, Jesse C. Goodman, Jr., was convicted by a Hickman County jury of one count of aggravated assault, a Class C felony, three counts of reckless endangerment, a Class E felony, and one count of assault, a Class A misdemeanor. All counts arose out of a single incident of domestic violence, with ramifications that included a four-hour standoff between the defendant and five law enforcement officers. The defendant was sentenced as a Range II, multiple offender to nine years for aggravated assault; two years for each of the reckless endangerment convictions; and eleven months and twenty-nine days for assault. The sentences for aggravated assault and reckless endangerment were ordered to be served consecutively, and the misdemeanor conviction was ordered to be served concurrently as to the other sentences, for an effective sentence of fifteen years in confinement. In this appeal as of right, the defendant presents two issues: (1) Whether the evidence was sufficient to convict him of either aggravated assault or assault; and (2) Whether the sentences were appropriate, both as to length of the aggravated assault sentence and the consecutive manner of service of the aggravated assault sentence and the reckless endangerment sentences. We conclude that the convicting evidence was sufficient, both as to the aggravated assault charge and the assault charge. We further conclude that the nine-year sentence for aggravated assault was appropriate, as was the consecutive manner of service of the sentences for aggravated assault and reckless endangerment. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Stephen W. Murphy vs. State - M2000-00014-CCA-R3-PC View
The petitioner appeals as of right from the Davidson County Criminal Court's denial of post-conviction relief. The petitioner pled guilty in 1998 to two counts of theft and was sentenced as a career offender to twelve years for D felony theft and six years for an E felony theft. The sentences were statutorily required to be served consecutively. Petitioner filed a timely pro se petition seeking post-conviction relief, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel and involuntary and unknowing guilty pleas. After an evidentiary hearing, the post-conviction court denied relief. Based upon our review, we affirm the post-conviction court's denial of the petitioner's request for post-conviction relief.

State vs. William Lewis Houston - M1999-01430-CCA-R3-CD View
Defendant was convicted by a Giles County jury of eight drug offenses and one count of aggravated assault. He received an effective sentence of seventy-two years. In this appeal, the defendant makes the following allegations: (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions; (2) the trial court committed plain error by consolidating all nine indictments for trial; (3) the process of selecting the jury venire was unconstitutional; (4) the trial court improperly limited the defendant's cross-examination of the undercover agent; (5) the trial court erred by admitting into evidence transcripts of certain tape recorded conversations and failed to properly instruct the jury concerning the transcripts; and (6) the trial court erred in its sentencing determinations. We conclude the trial court improperly sentenced the defendant and reduce the sentences to an effective term of forty-six years. The judgments of the trial court are affirmed in all other respects.

State vs. Ronald Byrd - E2000-00118-CCA-R3-CD View
The Defendant, Ronald W. Byrd, was convicted of criminal trespass, a Class C misdemeanor. In this appeal as of right, he asserts that the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction. We hold that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, and we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Myra L. Smith - E1999-02196-CCA-R3-CD View
Myra L. Smith appeals the sentencing decision of the Knox County Criminal Court revoking her non-incarcerative sentence and ordering service of the sentence in the TDOC. In September 1998, Smith pled guilty to the class C felony of facilitating aggravated robbery and was placed under the supervision of the Knox County Community Alternative to Prison Program (CAPP). Four months later, a violation warrant issued. On appeal, Smith argues that the trial court acted arbitrarily in revoking her suspended sentence by failing to consider her extreme drug addiction, her history of mental illness, and her lack of intent to violate the conditions of probation. Finding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion, we affirm.

State vs. Chester Lebron Bennett - E2000-02735-CCA-RM-CD View
This case presents an appeal to this court after remand by order of the Tennessee Supreme Court. The Appellant, Chester Lebron Bennett, pled guilty to five counts of criminal exposure to HIV and was sentenced to five concurrent four-year Department of Correction sentences. This court, on direct appeal, remanded the case to the trial court for consideration of alternative sentencing. See State v. Chester Lebron Bennett, No. 03C01-9810-CR-00346 (Tenn. Crim. App. at Knoxville, July 28, 1999), perm. to appeal granted, (Tenn. Oct. 16, 2000). Subsequent to this court's decision, the supreme court released its decision in the case of State v. Daryl Hooper, No. M1997-00031-SCR-11-CD (Tenn. at Nashville, Sept. 21, 2000) (for publication). In State v. Daryl Hooper, the court announced new sentencing considerations regarding the need for deterrence as grounds for denying an alternative sentence. In light of its decision in State v. Daryl Hooper, the court remanded the case to this court for reconsideration. See State v. Chester Lebron Bennett, No. E1998-00614-SC-R11-CD (Tenn. at Knoxville, Oct. 16, 2000). After revisiting this issue under the standards announced in State v. Daryl Hooper, we affirm the trial court's denial of alternative sentencing.

State vs. Frankie Lee Lunsford - E2000-00642-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant appeals from his sentences imposed in the Sullivan County Criminal Court for three counts of contributing to the unruliness of a minor, a Class A misdemeanor; one count of inhaling paint, a Class A misdemeanor; one count of public intoxication, a Class C misdemeanor; one count of giving paint to another for unlawful purposes, a Class E felony; and one count of possession of drug paraphernalia, a Class A misdemeanor. The trial court imposed a sentence of two years on the felony conviction to be served in the Department of Correction, with the misdemeanor sentences running concurrently to the felony and to each other. In this direct appeal, the defendant challenges the denial of probation or alternative sentencing. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Bobby Lee Tate vs. State - E2000-00796-CCA-R3-CD View
The petitioner appeals the trial court's denial of his "Motion to Vacate Judgment." Even though we treat the motion as a petition for habeas corpus relief and countenance the appeal via Tennessee Rule of Appellate Procedure 3(b), the record supports the trial court's determination that the factual allegations of improper or invalid judgments are unfounded. Thus, the trial court's denial of the motion or petition is affirmed.

State vs. Jeffrey Dwight Whaley - E2000-00646-CCA-R3-CD View
The trial court dismissed defendant's DUI presentment, finding a denial of the right to a preliminary hearing. Upon the state's appeal, we find no evidence of bad faith by the state. Accordingly, we reverse and remand to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

State vs. Roy Ray Wallace - E2000-00046-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant appeals his convictions for burglary and theft of property valued at less than five hundred dollars. He challenges the sufficiency of the evidence in light of the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice, the admissibility of a recording of his co-defendant's testimony, and the length of his sentence. We affirm the convictions and sentences.

State vs. Ricky Lee Netherton - E2000-01016-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant appeals his conviction for especially aggravated robbery, contesting the validity of the indictment and the length of his sentence. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Joshua Webster - E1999-02203-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant appeals the trial court's denial of probation or split confinement as the manner of serving his eight-year rape sentence. Because the record supports the trial court's imposition of an incarcerative sentence, we affirm.

State vs. Robert Bentley Miller - E1999-00970-CCA-R3-CD View
The Defendant, pursuant to a plea agreement, pleaded guilty as a Range II multiple offender to two counts of facilitation of the sale of a Schedule IV drug (a Class E felony) and three counts of facilitation of the sale of a Schedule VI drug (a Class A misdemeanor). The Defendant received sentences of three years for each of the felonies and eleven months, twenty-nine days for each of the misdemeanors. All five sentences were to be served concurrently, for an effective sentence of three years. The manner of service of the sentence was not part of the plea agreement but was to be decided by the trial court after a sentencing hearing. At the sentencing hearing, the trial court determined that the sentence should be served in the Department of Correction. In this appeal, the Defendant argues that he was wrongfully denied probation or alternative sentencing. Finding no merit to the Defendant's argument, we affirm the ruling of the trial court.

State vs. Tony Allen Leonard - E1999-00971-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant appeals his conviction for aggravated sexual battery, contending that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction, the trial court erred in allowing hearsay evidence, and the trial court erred in allowing the state to impeach the defendant on cross-examination with a prior felony conviction. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Daylon Demetric Roberts vs. State - E1999-02180-CCA-R3-PC View
The Defendant was convicted of murder perpetrated in an attempt to commit a robbery. His conviction was affirmed on appeal to this Court, and the Tennessee Supreme Court denied permission to appeal. The Defendant subsequently filed a petition for post-conviction relief. After an evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied the petition. The Defendant now appeals the trial court's denial of post-conviction relief, arguing that conflicts with his attorneys prevented the attorneys from providing him effective assistance of counsel at trial and that the trial court forced him to proceed to trial despite those conflicts. Finding no error in the record before us, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

---

Cases Posted the Week of (11/27/2000)
State vs. Reginald Tyrone Donnell - M1999-02184-CCA-R3-CD View
Defendant, Reginald Tyrone Donnell, was indicted on two counts of first degree murder. A Wilson County jury found him guilty of two counts of second degree murder. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced the Defendant to twenty-five (25) years in the Department of Correction for each count, with the sentences to run consecutively. The Defendant now appeals contending: 1) the evidence was insufficient to support convictions of second degree murder, 2) the trial court failed to exclude autopsy photographs of the victims, 3) the sentences imposed by the trial court were excessive, and 4) the trial court erred in ordering consecutive sentences. After review of the record, we affirm.

State vs. Brentol Calvin James - M1999-02533-CCA-R3-CD View
The appellant, Brentol Calvin James, was convicted by a jury in the Davidson County Criminal Court of one count of possession of a weapon during the commission of an offense, a class E felony. The trial court sentenced the appellant, as a Range I offender, to a one- year sentence of incarceration in the Davidson County Workhouse. The appellant raises the following issue for our review: whether the trial court erred in allowing a verdict to stand when there was insufficient evidence, as a matter of law, to support the conviction. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we reverse the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Rhonda Jennings - M1999-01093-CCA-R3-CD View
On October 28, 1998, at the conclusion of a bench trial, Rhonda Jennings, the defendant and appellant, was found guilty of one count of theft over five-hundred dollars and one count of theft under five-hundred dollars. Following a sentencing hearing on February 26, 1999, the trial court ordered the defendant to serve two years on community corrections after serving twenty days in jail. On April 29, 1999, a warrant was filed against the defendant alleging that she had violated a condition of her community corrections sentence. After an evidentiary hearing on July 12, 1999, the trial court revoked the defendant's community corrections sentence and re-sentenced her to eighteen months incarceration. On appeal, the appellant claims that her sentence is excessive. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Toronda Sherelle Williams - M2000-00212-CCA-R3-CD View
Following a grand jury indictment, Toranda Williams, the defendant and appellant, was tried and convicted of first-degree murder in the Davidson County Criminal Court. On appeal, she argues (1) that the trial court erroneously admitted testimony about the results of a polygraph examination; (2) that the court erroneously admitted hearsay testimony; and (3) that the cumulative effect of these errors was substantial enough to require reversal. Because we find the trial court's error in admitting the polygraph test results was harmless, and because the issue regarding hearsay testimony has been waived for failure to include it in the motion for a new trial, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Joseph Shepherd vs. State - E1999-01279-CCA-R3-PC & E1999-02266-CCA-R3-PC View
In consolidated cases, the petitioner appeals the trial court's dismissals of his post-conviction petitions as barred by the one-year statute of limitations. He contends, and the state concedes, that he filed the petitions within one year of the final order following his resentencing hearing. We reverse the dismissals and remand the cases for further proceedings.

State vs. Joshua Dailey - E1999-01342-CCA-R3-CD View
The Defendant, Joshua Dailey, pled guilty to two counts of the Class E felony offense of violation of the Habitual Motor Vehicle Offender Act. The trial court sentenced Defendant to two years for each conviction, to be served consecutively. Furthermore, the trial court ordered the first sentence to be served in split confinement, with 300 days incarceration in the county jail followed by placement in Community Corrections. The Defendant appeals, challenging the length of the total effective sentence and arguing that he should serve the entire sentence in Community Corrections. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Emit Keith Cody - E2000-02188-CCA-RM-CD View
The Defendant, Emit Keith Cody, was convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. He appealed, and we reversed his conviction and remanded the case for a new trial based on our conclusion that the trial court's failure to give a limiting instruction to the jury on the use of the State's main witness's prior inconsistent statement constituted plain error. See State v. Emit Keith Cody, No. E1999-00068-CCA-R3CD, 2000 WL 190227 (Tenn. Crim. App., Knoxville, Feb. 16, 2000). The State applied for permission to appeal to the supreme court, which granted permission for the purpose of remanding the case to this Court for reconsideration in light of the supreme court's recent decision in State v. Smith, 24 S.W.3d 274 (Tenn. 2000). After revisiting this issue, we remain of the opinion that the trial court committed plain error by failing to give a limiting instruction. Accordingly, the Defendant's conviction is reversed, and the case is remanded for a new trial.

State vs. Jerry L. Johns - E2000-00505-CCA-R3-CD View
The Defendant, Jerry L. Johns, appeals from the order of the trial court dismissing his "Motion to Vacate Judgment" as barred by the statute of limitations. The trial court apparently treated the Defendant's motion as a petition for post-conviction relief. We hold that the trial court properly treated the Defendant's motion as a petition for post-conviction relief and that the motion was properly dismissed because it was barred by the statute of limitations, because another post-conviction petition had already been filed and resolved on the merits, and because the grounds for relief alleged by the Defendant had been previously determined. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Kenneth Lee Weston vs. State - E1999-02095-CCA-R3-CO View
The Defendant, Kenneth Lee Weston, appeals as of right from the summary dismissal of his petition for writ of habeas corpus. He asserts that his convictions are void because the trial judge did not sign the court minutes reflecting the judgment. We hold that the failure of the trial judge to sign the court minutes does not render a judgment of conviction void. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Johnnie Bell, Jr. - E1999-00819-CCA-R9-CD View
State vs. Johnnie Bell, Jr. - E1999-00819-CCA-R9-CD (Concur/Dissent) View
The defendant, Johnnie Bell, Jr., challenges the trial court's order upholding the prosecutor's denial of pretrial diversion for the charges of vehicular homicide and aggravated assault. He contends that the prosecutor abused his discretion in failing to consider all the relevant factors and to list the factual disputes in the evidence. He argues that the trial court may not rehabilitate the prosecutor's letter and that this court must order pretrial diversion. We hold that the prosecutor failed to consider all the relevant factors but that the failure does not require the grant of pretrial diversion absent proof of entitlement. We affirm the trial court's order denying pretrial diversion.

State vs. Christina L. Howard - M1999-02473-CCA-R3-CD View
Defendant Christina L. Howard was found guilty by a Williamson County jury of possession with intent to sell or deliver cocaine in an amount greater than 300 grams, possession with intent to sell or deliver marijuana, and possession of drug paraphernalia. After a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced Defendant as a Range I standard offender to concurrent terms of twenty years for cocaine possession, one year for marijuana possession, and one day for possession of drug paraphernalia. Defendant raises the following issues in this appeal: (1) whether the trial court erred when it did not instruct the jury on the lesser-included offense of facilitation of a felony; (2) whether the trial court erred when it sentenced Defendant as a standard offender; and (3) whether the trial court erred when it denied Defendant alternative sentencing. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Alvin Vonner vs. State - M2000-00566-CCA-R3-CD View
The petitioner, Alvin Vonner, appeals the Hickman County Circuit Court's summary dismissal of his petition for habeas corpus relief and alleges that his 60 year second degree murder sentence has expired. Because the record fails to establish that the sentence has expired, we affirm the dismissal of the petition.

State vs. Lori A. Little - M1999-0858-CCA-R3-CD View
The Defendant, Lori A. Little, was convicted of two counts of forgery, both Class E felonies. In this appeal as of right, she argues (1) that the trial court improperly denied her the court's subpoena power prior to trial; (2) that the evidence was insufficient to support her convictions; (3) that the trial court improperly instructed the jury regarding NationsBank's obligations under the Uniform Commercial Code to reimburse customers for forgeries paid out of customers' accounts; (4) that the trial court improperly limited cross-examination of a prosecution witness regarding his bias; (5) that the jury was improperly tainted or biased by contact between a witness and a juror who were acquaintances; and (6) that the trial court intimidated the Defendant in a jury-out hearing during her direct examination at trial. We find no reversible error; thus, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Jeffrey English - M1999-02495-CCA-R3-CD View
On December 14, 1998, a Williamson County Grand Jury returned presentments charging Jeffrey English, the defendant and appellant, with three counts of aggravated robbery and one count of aggravated assault. The defendant pled guilty to three counts of aggravated assault. At a subsequent sentencing hearing, the defendant also pled true to violating the probation he was on at the time of the instant offenses. Following the hearing, the trial court sentenced the defendant to sixteen years for each count of aggravated robbery. His probation was revoked and he was sentenced to serve eight years for the prior aggravated robbery. The court ordered the defendant to serve all four sentences consecutively. On appeal, the defendant argues that his sentence is excessive. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Manolito Jemison - M1999-00752-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant was found guilty by a Davidson County jury of the lesser offense of voluntary manslaughter on one count of first degree premeditated murder and the lesser offense of reckless homicide on one count of felony murder. The counts were merged into one conviction for voluntary manslaughter, and the defendant was sentenced as a Range I, standard offender to six years in confinement. In this appeal as of right, the defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction for voluntary manslaughter and the length of his sentence, arguing that the trial court erroneously applied one enhancement factor and failed to apply two mitigating factors. Based upon our review, we agree that an enhancement factor was improperly applied. However, since two other enhancement factors were properly applied, and the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

---

Cases Posted the Week of (11/20/2000)
State vs. Jerry Lanier - W1999-00905-CCA-R3-CD View
The Defendant entered a plea of nolo contendere to the charge of retaliation for past action, reserving a certified question of law pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 37(b)(2)(i). The trial court sentenced him to one year incarceration and ordered that the sentence run consecutively to previously imposed sentences. In this appeal, the Defendant presents his reserved certified question of law: whether Tennessee Code Annotated § 39-16-510, the statute under which he was convicted, is constitutional. We hold that the statute is constitutional and accordingly affirm the Defendant's conviction.

State vs. Daniel Malone - W1999-01678-CCA-R9-CD View
The Defendant was indicted for statutory rape and contributing to the delinquency of a minor. The District Attorney General denied the Defendant's application for pretrial diversion. The trial court subsequently granted pretrial diversion. Pursuant to Rule 9 of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure, the trial court granted the State permission for an interlocutory appeal, and this Court allowed the State's appeal. On appeal, the State argues that the trial court erred in granting pretrial diversion. We agree that the trial court committed reversible error in granting pretrial diversion and remand to the circuit court for further proceedings.

State vs. Michael Jackson - W1999-00358-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant was convicted of aggravated robbery and sentenced to twelve years confinement as a standard, Range I offender. On appeal, the defendant argues that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury's verdict, and that the trial court erred in its application of sentencing enhancement factors. Based upon our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Johnny Jones - W2000-01241-CCA-R3-PC View
This appeal follows dismissal of the Appellant's petition for post-conviction relief. The Appellant, Jones, was convicted by a Fayette County jury of possession of cocaine (over 26 grams) with intent to sell and possession of marijuana. On direct appeal, his convictions and sentences were affirmed. The Appellant filed this post-conviction petition asserting the following errors: (1) the trial court erred in not granting the Appellant's motion to sever; (2) the trial court erred in sentencing the Appellant; and (3) deficient representation by defense counsel including failing to timely file a Rule 11 application to the supreme court from this court's decision. We find that Appellant's defense counsel was ineffective with respect to his failure to timely file a Rule 11 application. Accordingly, the Appellant is granted the right to seek a delayed appeal to the Tennessee Supreme Court. Denial of post-conviction relief is affirmed as to the remaining issues.

State vs. Jerry Belew - M1999-02143-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant was convicted by a Maury County jury of attempted second degree murder and aggravated assault. The trial court sentenced defendant to consecutive sentences of nine years for attempted second degree murder and three years for aggravated assault. In this appeal defendant alleges that the trial court: (1) improperly limited defense counsel's closing argument; (2) improperly denied his requested jury charges; and (3) improperly sentenced him to consecutive sentences. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Andrew D. Bledsoe - M1999-00788-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant, after being convicted of reckless homicide, appeals his sentence of three and one-half years incarceration. He argues that the trial court incorrectly imposed an excessive sentence and that the trial court erred by not imposing any form of alternative sentence. We hold that a death, although unfortunate and tragic, standing alone, is insufficient to deny an alternative sentence given our legislative mandate that Range I standard offenders convicted of any Class D felony are presumed to be favorable candidates for alternative sentencing. Therefore, after careful review, we affirm the length of the sentence; however, we modify its manner of service to an alternative sentence of split confinement of one year and the remaining two and one-half years on probation.

State vs. James D. Brazelton - M1999-02477-CCA-R3-CD View
The appellant, James D. Brazelton, was convicted by a jury in the Davidson County Criminal Court of one count of possession of marijuana, over 10 pounds but less than 70 pounds, with the intent to deliver, a class D felony. The trial court sentenced the appellant, as a Range II offender, to seven years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The appellant raises the following issues for our review: (1) whether the jury's verdict was supported by the evidence; and (2) whether the sentence imposed by the trial court was excessive. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Thomas E. Davenport and John Simmons - M2000-00317-CCA-R3-CD View
Both defendants were convicted by a Williamson County jury of selling more than 0.5 grams of cocaine, a Class B felony. Both defendants were sentenced as Range II, multiple offenders. Defendant Simmons received a sixteen-year sentence, and defendant Davenport received a fifteen-year sentence. In this direct appeal, both defendants challenge (1) the sufficiency of the evidence, and (2) the length and manner of service of their sentences. Simmons further raises the following issues: (1) whether he was denied a speedy trial; (2) whether the trial court erred in denying his motion to dismiss due to the absence of proper signatures on the indictment; and (3) whether the trial court erred in failing to require the state to elect an offense upon which to proceed. Additionally, Davenport makes the following allegations: (1) the trial court erred in allowing portions of the audio taped drug transaction to be presented to the jury; (2) the trial court erred in ruling his prior convictions were admissible under Tenn. R. Evid. 609; and (3) the trial court erred in denying his motion for a mistrial when the informant referred to Davenport's offering her a crack pipe. Based upon a review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court as it relates to defendant Simmons; however, we reverse defendant Davenport's conviction for the sale of cocaine and reduce it to simple possession of cocaine. We remand to the trial court to re-sentence defendant Davenport.

William Andrew Dixon vs. Flora J. Holland, Warden - M1999-02494-CCA-R3-PC View
William Andrew Dixon was convicted of kidnapping for ransom in violation of Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-2603 in April 1981 in the Circuit Court of Dickson County. The offense was committed in April 1978. Between the time of the offense in 1978, and the time of trial in 1981, kidnapping for ransom was redesignated by the legislature as the offense of aggravated kidnapping; the maximum punishment was reduced by the legislature from life imprisonment without parole to life imprisonment with the possibility of parole. The Tennessee Department of Correction maintains that it is incarcerating Petitioner under a sentence of life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. Petitioner filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus in the Criminal Court of Davidson County, asserting the judgment is illegal and void. The petition was denied. The judgment is affirmed.

State vs. Michael P. Inlow -M1999- 00092-CCA-R3-CD View
On December 18, 1998, a Williamson County Jury convicted Michael Inlow, the defendant and appellant, of attempting to commit second-degree murder. Following a sentencing hearing, the court sentenced the defendant to serve twelve (12) years incarceration. On appeal, the defendant claims (1) that the evidence was insufficient to convict him; (2) that the trial court should have declared a mistrial after a witness referred to the defendant's prior criminal history; (3) that the trial court improperly allowed the jury to consider hearsay testimony; (4) that the trial court improperly instructed the jury regarding self-defense; and (5) that his sentence was excessive. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Kenneth Ray Jarman - M1999-01382-CCA-R3-CD View
The appellant, Kenneth Ray Jarman, pled guilty in the Montgomery County Criminal Court to one count of driving under the influence (hereinafter "DUI"), fourth offense or over, a class E felony; one count of driving on a revoked license, sixth offense, a class A misdemeanor; and one count of violating the open container law, a class C misdemeanor. The trial court sentenced the appellant to two years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction for the DUI conviction, and imposed a $3000 fine. The trial court also sentenced the appellant to eleven months and twenty-nine days incarceration in the Montgomery County Jail for the driving on a revoked license conviction, and imposed a $350 fine. The trial court further sentenced the appellant to thirty days incarceration in the Montgomery County Jail for the violation of the open container law. Additionally, the trial court ordered the appellant's sentences to be served concurrently. The appellant raises the following issues for review: (1) whether the enhancing factors applied by the trial court were inapplicable to this case; and (2) whether the trial court erred in sentencing the appellant to serve the full term of his two-year sentence in the Tennessee Department of Correction. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm in part and modify the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Roderick Johnson - M1999-00605-CCA-R3-CD View
A Davidson County jury convicted defendant of second degree murder. In this appeal as a matter of right, defendant challenges only the sufficiency of the evidence upon which the jury based his conviction. Our review of the record reflects sufficient evidence to support the jury's finding. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Christopher Karvey - M1999-02590-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant entered a plea of guilty to DUI, and attempted to reserve a certified question of law pursuant to Tenn. R. Crim. P. 37(b)(2)(i). The defendant contends that the stop of his vehicle by police was illegal and that all evidence obtained as a result thereof must be suppressed. Because the defendant failed to properly reserve the certified question, the appeal is dismissed.

State vs. Faron Douglas Pierce - E1999-02210-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant, Faron Douglas Pierce, was convicted of one count of aggravated robbery. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-402. The trial court imposed a Range II sentence of 20 years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. In this appeal as of right, the defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence and contends that his sentence is excessive. Because the evidence is sufficient and because the defendant has failed to demonstrate that his sentence is excessive, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Peter George Crehan - M1999-02542-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant was convicted by a Robertson County jury of driving under the influence ("DUI"), third offense, and reckless driving. Defendant claims on appeal that the trial court erred by (1) sustaining his conviction for DUI, third offense, despite the indictment's failure to allege the specific court in Davidson County where he received his two prior DUI convictions; and (2) the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction for reckless driving. After a through review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Carl David Burnette - M1999-2490-CCA-R3-CD View
Defendant Carl David Burnette was found guilty by a Grundy County jury of vehicular homicide as the proximate result of intoxication, Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-213(a)(2), a Class B felony, and of driving under the influence of an intoxicant, Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-401(a). Afterward, the same jury was requested to separately consider whether Defendant was guilty of aggravated vehicular homicide, Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-218(a)(3), a Class A felony. The jury decided that Defendant was guilty of the aggravated offense in lieu of vehicular homicide; the conviction for driving under the influence was subsequently merged into the count of aggravated vehicular homicide and Defendant received a sentence of twenty-two years. Defendant raises the following issues in this appeal: (1) whether the trial court erred when it overruled Defendant's motion to suppress the results of blood alcohol tests because the State failed to identify Defendant as the one from whom the blood samples were drawn, and (2) whether the trial court properly bifurcated the jury proceedings as required by Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-218(c) when charging aggravated vehicular homicide. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Charles Ricky Deason - M2000-00497-CCA-R3-CD View
The appellant, Charles Ricky Deason, pled guilty in the Montgomery County Circuit Court to one count of driving under the influence (hereinafter "DUI"), seventh offense; one count of leaving the scene of an accident; one count of driving on a revoked license, fourth offense; one count of DUI, second offense; and two counts of misdemeanor assault. The trial court sentenced the appellant to eleven months and twenty-nine days incarceration in the Montgomery County Jail for DUI, seventh offense. The trial court also sentenced the appellant to thirty days incarceration for leaving the scene of an accident, to be served concurrently with the sentence for DUI, seventh offense. Additionally, the trial court sentenced the appellant to an eleven month and twenty-nine day suspended sentence for driving on a revoked license, fourth offense, and ordered this sentence to be served consecutively to the DUI, seventh offense, and leaving the scene of an accident. The trial court further sentenced the appellant to eleven months and twenty-nine days incarceration, with ninety days to be served in incarceration and the remainder suspended, for the DUI, second offense, and ordered this sentence to be served consecutively to the DUI, seventh offense, and leaving the scene of an accident, and consecutively to the driving on a revoked license, fourth offense. Finally, the trial court sentenced the appellant to eleven months and twenty-nine days probation for each of the assault convictions and ordered these sentences to be served concurrently with each other, but consecutively to the other sentences. Subsequently, the appellant violated his probation by driving on a revoked license, violating the Light Law, and improper vehicle registration. The trial court revoked the appellant's probation and ordered the appellant to serve the remainder of his sentence in incarceration. The appellant presents the following issue for our review: whether the judgment of the trial court compelling the appellant to serve the full balance of his sentences in confinement was supported by the evidence. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Bobby Garner - M1999-01427-CCA-R3-CD View
Following a Montgomery County Grand Jury indictment, Bobby Garner, the defendant and appellant, pled guilty to one count of aggravated burglary and one count of theft of property over one-thousand dollars. After a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced the defendant to serve five years for aggravated burglary and three years for theft. The trial court ordered the defendant to serve the sentences consecutively. On appeal, the defendant argues (1) that the sentences imposed were excessive, (2) that he should have been sentenced alternatively, and (3) that consecutive sentences were inappropriate. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Michael N. Grey - M1999-01428-CCA-R3-CD View
The appellant, Michael N. Grey, was convicted by a jury in the Dickson County Circuit Court of two counts of aggravated robbery, a class B felony, and two counts of theft under $500, a class A misdemeanor. The trial court sentenced the appellant to ten years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction for the aggravated robbery convictions. The trial court also sentenced the appellant to eleven months and twenty-nine days incarceration in the Dickson County Jail for the theft convictions.The trial court further ordered that the appellant's sentences be served concurrently. The appellant raises the following issue for review: whether the appellant was denied due process because the State failed to provide him with proper pre-trial exculpatory evidence. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm in part and reverse in part the judgments of the trial court.

State vs. Charles S. Jones - M1999-02335-CCA-R3-CD View
On October 30, 1997, the defendant offered guilty pleas to six counts of aggravated burglary, five counts of theft over one thousand dollars, one count of theft under one thousand dollars, and one count of possession of an illegal weapon. After a December sentencing hearing, the trial court ordered the defendant placed on probation and granted him post-trial diversion for a period of six years during which he was to comply with a variety of requirements. Subsequently, separate affidavits were filed in July and September of 1998 alleging that the defendant had violated the terms of his probation. Following a March 1999 hearing concerning these allegations, the trial court entered judgment on the defendant's aforementioned twelve guilty pleas and sentenced him as a Range I Standard Offender to serve an effective sentence of four years for the burglary and theft charges consecutively to eighteen months for the possession of an illegal weapon offense. On appeal, the defendant claims that the trial court erred by (1) failing to consider him for alternative sentencing; (2) improperly enhancing his possession of an illegal weapon sentence and one of his aggravated burglary sentences; and (3) ordering the possession of an illegal weapon charge to run consecutively. After having reviewed the record and applicable authorities, we find these issues to be without merit and, therefore, affirm the trial court's sentence.

James Earl Kirk, et al. vs. State - M1999-01369-CCA-OT-CO View
In this interlocutory appeal the State raises the question of whether the Maury County Circuit Court, relying on Tenn. R. Crim. P. 5(a), erred by ordering that all proceedings in a case heard in general sessions court must be heard in the court closest to the location of the offense. It is the opinion of this Court that the plain language of Tenn. R. Crim. P. 5(a) controls the outcome of this case. The controversy in this case turns on the word "nearest" as used in the statute. A cursory reading of the statute could understandably lead one to believe that the term "nearest" was intended to convey geographic proximity. However, such a narrow reading of the word does not yield the desired result the Rule was intended to have, and cannot be read within the strict confines of the plain language set forth therein. The term "nearest" is broader in scope than mere geographical distance. It is the opinion of this Court that as used in Tenn. R. Crim. P. 5(a), "nearest" was intended to be analyzed temporally.

State vs. James E. Mathis - M2000-00316-CCAR3-CD View
Defendant James E. Mathis was convicted by a Williamson County jury of possession of contraband in a penal institution and sentenced to eight (8) years incarceration in the Department of Correction. In this appeal as of right Defendant raises one issue for appellate review: whether the trial court erred when it refused to suppress incriminating statements made by Defendant to the corrections officers. Defendant contends that his conviction must be reversed and a new trial ordered. After a review of the entire record and applicable law we find no reversible error and affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Joel Richard Schmeiderer - M1999-02546-CCA-R3-CD View
The Defendant, Joel Richard Schmiederer, was found guilty by a jury of the following eight offenses: first degree felony murder, first degree premeditated murder, two counts of attempted first degree premeditated murder, burglary of an automobile, theft under $500, and possession of a firearm with an altered serial number. The two murder convictions were merged into a single first degree murder conviction, and the Defendant was given a life sentence for that offense. He was also sentenced as a Range I, standard offender to twenty-five years for each of the two attempted first degree murder convictions, two years for burglary of an automobile, and eleven months twenty-nine days each for theft under $500 and for possession of a handgun with an altered serial number. The trial court then ordered the two sentences for attempted murder to be served consecutive to each other and consecutive to the first degree murder conviction. On appeal, the Defendant argues (1) that the evidence was insufficient to convict him of any offense except possession of a handgun with an altered serial number; (2) that the trial court erred by charging the jury with felony murder and with first degree premeditated murder; (3) that the trial court erred by not instructing the jury on additional lesser included offenses; and (4) that the trial court erred by imposing the maximum sentence for each of the felony offenses and by ordering three of the felony sentences to be served consecutively. We find no reversible error; accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Thomas W. Yelton vs. State - M1999-00597-CCA-R3-PC View
The petitioner, Thomas W. Yelton, appeals the denial by the Bedford County Circuit Court of his petition for post-conviction relief from his 1992 convictions of fabricating evidence, theft of property worth more than one thousand dollars ($1,000), coercion of a witness, and harassment. Specifically, he alleges that he is entitled to relief from his convictions because he received ineffective assistance of counsel during trial proceedings. The petitioner predicates his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel upon the following grounds: (1) trial counsel failed to submit to the trial court a motion requesting the severance of his offenses; (2) trial counsel maintained inadequate contact with the petitioner during trial proceedings; (3) trial counsel failed to adequately investigate his case; and (4) trial counsel failed to adequately advise the petitioner concerning the waiver of his right to appeal his convictions. Following a review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

---

Cases Posted the Week of (11/06/2000)
State vs. John Clark Garrison - E1999-00121-CCA-R3-CD View
On August 3, 1992, the defendant pled guilty to two counts of theft under Tennessee Code Annotated sections 39-14-103, -105(4). The defendant was sentenced to two consecutive nine-year sentences and ordered to pay restitution in the amount of $51,000. On June 8, 1999, the defendant filed a Motion to Correct Illegal Sentence. It was denied. In this appeal, the defendant contends that 1) the trial court erred in its finding that the defendant's sentence of incarceration and restitution was legal as a matter of law; and 2) the trial court erred by finding that the defendant knowingly and voluntarily entered into a plea agreement involving an illegal sentence. After a careful review, we find no merit in these issues, and find that the defendant's sentence is legal. The defendant's sentence of incarceration and the court's imposition of restitution is affirmed.

State vs. Doyle Stevens - E1999-02097-CCA-R3-CD View
In July 1999, the defendant entered a plea of nolo contendre on two counts of vehicular homicide and one count of aggravated assault. The defendant contends that the trial court erred by not granting judicial diversion. We conclude that the defendant was not a "qualified defendant" for judicial diversion. His 1992 conviction for driving while under the influence of an intoxicant qualifies as a Class A misdemeanor, and therefore he is not "qualified" for judicial diversion. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

William Boyd vs. State - E1999-01279-CCA-R3-PC View
The petitioner, William Boyd, appeals from the trial court's denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. Boyd alleges that his eight-year sentence for the offense of especially aggravated sexual exploitation of a minor, which is to be served at 100 percent, is illegal. We agree that the sentence is illegal and therefore reverse the trial court's dismissal of the post-conviction petition, vacate the conviction of especially aggravated sexual exploitation of a minor and the dismissal of the charge of aggravated rape, and remand to the trial court for further proceedings.

State vs. Christopher Lindsay - E1998-00036-CCA-R3-CD View
State vs. Christopher Lindsay - E1998-00036-CCA-R3-CD (Judgment Order) View
On September 25, 1998, Christopher Lindsay, the defendant and appellant, pled guilty to driving under the influence, second offense. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced the defendant to eleven months and twenty-nine days, all of which was to be served on probation except forty-five days. On appeal, the defendant argues (1) that the trial court should have ordered the defendant to serve his mandatory minimum incarceration in a work release program, and (2) that the trial court should have ordered the defendant to serve his mandatory minimum incarceration on a periodic basis. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. John Brown - W1999-00626-CCA-R3-CD View
John Brown appeals from his Shelby County convictions of aggravated robbery and especially aggravated kidnapping. He alleges insufficiency of identification evidence and plain error in admission of evidence of arrests for other crimes. Because there is no error of record requiring reversal, we affirm.

State vs. Eric Hall - W1999-00610-CCA-R3-CD View
A Shelby County jury convicted the appellant, Eric B. Hall, of one (1) count of robbery and one (1) count of theft of property over the value of $1,000. The trial court sentenced the appellant as a Range II, Multiple Offender, to consecutive sentences of ten (10) years for robbery and eight (8) years for theft of property. On appeal, the appellant contends that: (1) the evidence is insufficient to sustain his convictions; (2) the trial court improperly charged the jury with regard to the statutory elements of robbery; and (3) the trial court imposed excessive sentences by ordering consecutive sentencing. After a thorough review of the record before this Court, we hold that the evidence is sufficient to sustain the jury's guilty verdict for theft of property over $1,000 and that conviction is affirmed. Regarding the appellant's conviction for robbery, however, the state presented insufficient evidence that the requisite element of fear or violence was the mechanism by which the theft of jewelry was accomplished. Therefore, the appellant's conviction for robbery is reversed, and the conviction for that offense is dismissed. The case is remanded for a new trial on the offense of theft of property.

State vs. Jenniefer Oakley - W1999-00850-CCA-R3-CD View
Jennifer E. Oakley entered guilty pleas to three counts of misdemeanor possession of a controlled substance and one count of possession of drug paraphernalia. The manner of service, including the request for judicial diversion, was submitted to the trial court. The trial court denied a grant of judicial diversion based upon the circumstances of the offenses and the inherent dangerous effect of drugs to our communities. After review, we conclude that the record supports the trial court's denial of diversion. The judgment, accordingly, is affirmed.

State vs. Frederick Parks - W1999-01357-CCA-R3-CD View
Defendant, Frederick Parks, was found guilty by a Madison County jury of one count of burglary and one count of theft over $500, for which he received consecutive sentences of four years and two years, respectively. The jury also fined the defendant $750, and the trial court ordered the defendant to pay $1500 in restitution. On appeal, the defendant raises two issues: 1) whether the evidence presented at trial was sufficient to support his convictions; and 2) whether the trial court erred by imposing consecutive sentences on the defendant. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

State vs. Jason Beeler - W1999-01417-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant appeals from jury trial convictions for reckless homicide, felony murder, aggravated burglary, and two counts of especially aggravated kidnapping. In this appeal, the defendant alleges insufficient evidence, errors in admitting certain evidence, prosecutorial misconduct, improper instructions, and error in denying his writ of error coram nobis. Concluding that it was reversible error to not instruct on the lesser-included offenses of felony murder, we remand for a new trial on the felony murder count. We affirm the remaining convictions.

State vs. Stanley Blackwood - W1999-01221-CCA-R3-CD View
A Madison County Grand Jury indicted the defendant, Stanley Blackwood, for one count of first-degree murder, three counts of attempted first-degree murder, five counts of aggravated assault, two counts of reckless endangerment and one count of aggravated burglary. Following a trial, a jury convicted the defendant on all counts, and the trial court imposed an effective sentence of life plus twenty-two (22) years incarceration. On appeal, the defendant contends (1) that the evidence was insufficient to sustain all of the convictions; (2) that the trial court erroneously instructed the jury; (3) that the trial court erroneously refused to admit results of a polygraph examination; (4) that the trial court should have merged two counts of aggravated assault with two counts of attempted first-degree murder; and (5) that the defendant's sentence was excessive. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Jimmy Pierce - W2000-00630-CCA-R3-PC View
The petitioner, Jimmy Lee Pierce, was convicted of aggravated kidnapping and was sentenced to a term of 11 years. Because the petitioner received the effective assistance of counsel at trial and because there is no merit to his claim that the evidence was insufficient to convict, he is not entitled to post-conviction relief.

State vs. Jeffrey Bivens - W1999-01028-CCA-R3-PC View
Jeffrey Bivens appeals from the Madison County Circuit Court's denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. Although the petition was filed outside the one year limitations period, the post-conviction court excused the "late-filed" petition "in the interest of justice." Following a hearing upon the merits of the petition, the court denied post-conviction relief. Because the petition was time-barred, the post-conviction court was without jurisdiction to conduct a hearing on the merits. For this reason, dismissal of the petition is affirmed.

State vs. Earl Taylor - W2000-00071-CCA-R3-CD View
The appellant, Earl Arnoz Taylor, was convicted of second degree murder in the Lauderdale County Circuit Court. On appeal, he argues that the evidence produced at trial was insufficient to support the verdict. After review, we find the evidence sufficient and affirm the judgment.

State vs. Norico Woods - W2000-00057-CCA-R3-CD View
The appellant, Norico S. Woods, appeals from the order of the Madison County Circuit Court revoking her Community Corrections sentences and reinstating her original nine-year sentence in the Department of Correction. We affirm the judgment of the trial court pursuant to Rule 20, Tenn. Crim. App. R.

State v. Charles Ray Allen - M1999-00818-CCA-R3-CD View
The Defendant was convicted by a jury of first degree premeditated murder and criminal attempt to commit voluntary manslaughter. He was sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder, and to a consecutive four year term for the attempted manslaughter. In this appeal as of right, the Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence; the trial court's exclusion of proof about the victim's prior violent conduct; the trial court's instruction to the jury about the penalties for first degree murder; and his sentencing. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

State v. Dwanna L. Mason - M1999-02535-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant pled guilty in Davidson County Criminal Court to vehicular homicide by reckless conduct, a Class C felony, and four lesser charges against her were dismissed. Her guilty plea was submitted without any agreement of the parties as to length or manner of service of sentence. After a sentencing hearing at which the defendant testified, the trial court sentenced her to five years and six months in continuous confinement. The defendant appeals as of right this sentence. We conclude that the imposition of a sentence of five years and six months was appropriate. We affirm the sentence as to length but modify it to show a period of confinement equal to time already served with the remaining time to be served on probation.

State v. Anthony Borg - M1999-02360-CCA-R3-CD View
Defendant, Anthony Borg, pled guilty to one count of burglary and was sentenced by the trial court to a term of four years in the Department of Correction. On appeal, the defendant raises two issues: (1) whether the trial court erred by imposing the maximum sentence; and (2) whether the trial court erred in denying the defendant alternative sentencing. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

State v. Daronopolis R. Sweatt - M1999-02522-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant was convicted of first degree felony murder and aggravated robbery. He was given a life sentence for the murder conviction, and eleven years for the robbery conviction, with the robbery sentence to be served consecutively to the life sentence. The defendant appeals his convictions and sentencing, arguing that: 1) the State failed to prove venue by a preponderance of the evidence; 2) the trial court erred in allowing the prosecutor to ask the defendant why he had not earlier provided the alibi that he offered at trial to law enforcement officials; 3) the trial court erred in applying enhancement factor (6) to enhance the sentence for his aggravated robbery conviction; and 4) that the trial court erred in ordering that he serve his aggravated robbery sentence consecutively to his life sentence. Based upon our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

---

Cases Posted the Week of (10/30/2000)
William Collins vs. State - E1999-02759-CCA-R3-PC View
Because the trial court properly treated a habeas corpus petition as one for post-conviction relief and because the statute of limitations barred any review of constitutional issues, the petition was properly dismissed.

State vs. Billy Kenneth Hall - E1999-02146-CCA-R3-CD View
The defendant appeals his convictions for aggravated kidnapping and aggravated rape, contending that the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions, that the trial court should have granted a continuance to allow him to substitute counsel, and that his attorney was constitutionally ineffective. We affirm the trial court.

State vs. William A. Holt - M2000-01063-CCA-R3-PC View
The appellant was originally convicted by a Marshall County jury of attempt to commit first degree murder, and he received a sentence of twenty-one years imprisonment. The conviction was affirmed on direct appeal. He sought post-conviction relief, which was denied by the trial court. In this appeal as a matter of right, the appellant contends that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel. After a thorough review of the record, we conclude that the trial court correctly denied post-conviction relief.

State vs. Kenneth Sisco - M2000-00036-CCA-R3-CD View
The Defendant pleaded guilty to the offense of robbery. His plea agreement provided that he would be sentenced as a Range II multiple offender, with the length of the sentence to be determined by the trial judge. Following a sentencing hearing, the judge sentenced him to ten years in the Department of Correction. On appeal, the Defendant argues that the trial judge erred by setting his sentence at ten years. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Warner Powell and Charlie Stokes - M1999-00661-CCA-R3-CD View
This is an appeal as of right by the State of Tennessee, which argues that the trial court erred by suppressing the evidence obtained against the Defendants pursuant to a search warrant. The State asserts that the trial court incorrectly concluded that the search warrant was invalid because the agent who provided the information in the affidavit establishing probable cause to search did not have the authority to execute the warrant or arrest the Defendants. In response, the Defendants assert that the State's notice of appeal was not timely filed, and they argue that the evidence was properly suppressed because the agent did not have the authority to obtain or execute the search warrant and because the affidavit did not establish the veracity of the confidential informant. We conclude that the State's notice of appeal was not timely filed, but we will consider the appeal in the interest of justice. We further conclude that the search warrant was valid; thus the trial court erred by suppressing the evidence obtained pursuant to the warrant. Accordingly, the trial court's order suppressing the evidence is reversed, and this case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

State vs. Barry Waters Rogers - M1999-01389-CCA-R3-CD View
The appellant, Barry Waters Rogers, appeals his conviction by a jury in the Giles County Circuit Court of driving under the influence of an intoxicant. On appeal, the appellant challenges the sufficiency of the underlying indictment. Following a review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Jimmy Ray Mitchell - M1999-02536-CCA-R3-CD View
The appellant/defendant, Jimmy Ray Mitchell, appeals as of right from a judgment of the Davidson County Criminal Court from a jury conviction for the offense of driving under the influence of an intoxicant, first offense. The trial court imposed a sentence of eleven (11) months and twenty-nine (29) days, after the defendant serves fifteen (15) days, the defendant shall be on probation for eleven (11) months and twenty-nine (29) days. The trial court imposed a fine of five hundred dollars ($500). In his single appellate issue, the defendant contends that the trial court erroneously admitted evidence of the breath test results. After a complete review of the record in this cause, we find the defendant failed to allege such trial error in his original motion for a new trial. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

State vs. Pamela Denise Wiser - M1999-02500-CCA-R3-CD View
Defendant Pamela Denise Wiser was convicted of twenty-two counts of the offense of criminal exposure to HIV, a Class C felony. Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-109 (1997). The offenses occurred in Bedford and Marshall counties. Defendant was sentenced to a total of twenty-six years and six months, with some sentences running concurrently and some consecutively. On this consolidated direct appeal, Defendant argues that the trial court erred in applying two enhancement factors and that the length of her aggregate sentence is not reasonably related to the severity of the offenses nor necessary to protect the public from further serious criminal conduct by Defendant. We find that the trial court erred in its application of one enhancement factor. We have determined, however, that the remaining enhancement factors are sufficient to support the trial court's sentence and that the aggregate sentence is not unreasonable. Accordingly, the judgments of the trial court are affirmed.

State vs. Ralph Dewayne Moore - E1999-02743-CCA-R3-CD View
State vs. Ralph Dewayne Moore - E19