This Page Last Updated: November 08, 2007 at 10:49.36 hours
The following Opinions are available for download:
Cases posted the week of 06/25/2007
State vs. June LeeAnn Franks - M2006-02157-CCA-R3-CD View
Giles County - The Defendant, June Leeann Franks, pled guilty to statutory rape. Her request for judicial diversion was denied by the trial court, who sentenced her to fifteen months to be served on probation. She appeals that decision. Upon review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Tommy Pleas Arwood, Jr. - M2003-01125-CCA-R3-CD View
Bedford County - The Defendant, Tommy Pleas Arwood, Jr., appeals from his convictions on three counts of theft, two counts of burglary, and one count of evading arrest. On appeal, he alleges the following: (1) he was denied an effective appeal due to the lack of an official and reliable transcript of the proceedings; (2) the trial court erred in denying the Defendant’s motions to dismiss and to suppress; (3) the evidence at trial was insufficient to sustain his convictions; and (4) the trial court erred in sentencing the Defendant. After a thorough review of the record and applicable law, we conclude that there are no errors in the judgments of the trial court, and we affirm those judgments.
Calvin Otis Tankesly vs. State - M2005-02008-CCA-R3-PC View
Davidson County - The petitioner, Calvin Otis Tankesly, appeals the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. On appeal, the petitioner claims that: (1) the trial court failed to instruct the jury on all lesser-included offenses of rape of a child; (2) he was denied his constitutional right to an impartial jury as a result of juror misconduct; (3) he was improperly sentenced as a repeat violent offender; and (4) he received the ineffective assistance of counsel. Following our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court denying post-conviction relief.
State vs. Donald D. Mathis a.k.a. Michael D. Mathis a.k.a. Michael Lee Dixon M2005-02259-CCA-R3-CD View
Davidson County - The defendant, Donald D. Mathis a.k.a. Michael D. Mathis a.k.a. Michael Lee Dixon, was convicted of robbery (Class C felony) by a Davidson County jury and was subsequently sentenced to serve fifteen years in the Tennessee Department of Correction as a Range III, persistent offender. On appeal he contends that: (1) there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction; (2) the trial court erred in not suppressing his confession to police; (3) the trial court erred in allowing introduction of a surveillance photo; (4) the trial court erred in denying a requested jury charge; (5) the trial court erred in approving the jury verdict as the thirteenth juror; and (6) the trial court erred in sentencing the defendant to the maximum within his range. After careful review, we find no error and affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Samuel L. Mangrum - M2006-01340-CCA-R3-CD View
Williamson County - The Defendant, Samuel L. Mangrum, was convicted by a Williamson County jury of driving under the influence, second offense. On appeal, he alleges the trial court erred in not declaring a mistrial after he objected to a portion of the videotaped stop that was played for the jury. After a thorough review of the record and applicable law, we find no error and affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Stanley Cornelius Osborne - M2005-02926-CCA-R3-CD View
Davidson County - The appellant, Stanley Cornelius Osborne, was convicted by a jury in the Davidson County Criminal Court of one count of aggravated sexual battery. He received a sentence of ten years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the appellant challenges the trial court’s failure to (1) exclude the appellant’s statement to police during a custodial interrogation, (2) exclude a statement made by the victim in the course of her medical treatment, (3) exclude a statement made by the victim because it was not an excited utterance, and (4) exclude testimony regarding the contents of a “lost confession letter” because it was not disclosed in discovery and the “testifying witness did not remember significant portions of the letter.” Upon review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Dennis Pylant vs. State - M2005-02721-CCA-R3-PC View
Dennis Pylant vs. State - M2005-02721-CCA-R3-PC (separate dissenting opinion) View
Cheatham County - The petitioner, Dennis Pylant, appeals the denial of post-conviction relief by the Cheatham County Circuit Court after an evidentiary hearing. On appeal, the petitioner contends the trial court erred in: (1) suppressing hearsay testimony; (2) finding trial counsel effective; and (3) denying relief based on the cumulative effect of the alleged errors. After careful review, we affirm the post-conviction court’s denial of relief.
State vs. Joseph Owen Smith - M2006-02116-CCA-R3-CD View
Dickson County - The Defendant, Joseph Owen Smith, pled nolo contendere to criminally negligent homicide in connection with the death of Jeffery Ray Doss. Following the sentencing hearing, the Defendant received a one year sentence, with six months to be served in the county jail and six months to be served on probation. On appeal, the Defendant argues that the trial court erred by denying him “full probation.” We conclude that the trial court did not err by ordering split confinement in this case. However, based upon the Defendant’s classification as a Range I, standard offender, we conclude that the Defendant may only be required to serve 30% of his sentence in incarceration. Therefore, we remand for the entry of a judgment reflecting that the Defendant shall serve no longer than 30% of his term of one year in confinement and the remainder to be served on probation.
State vs. Atoya Every/Charlie Fleming - W2005-00547-CCA-R3-CD
View
Shelby County - The defendants, Atoya L. Every and Charlie Letez Fleming, were indicted for felony murder in the perpetration of aggravated child neglect resulting in the death of the two-year-old victim, Amber Cox Cody. A jury convicted the defendants of misdemeanor reckless endangerment (Class A misdemeanor). Both defendants were sentenced to eleven months and twenty-nine days. Defendant Every was placed on full probation. Defendant Fleming was sentenced to serve six weeks, with the remainder on probation. The defendants’ appeals of their convictions have been consolidated. Defendant Every poses two issues: 1) whether misdemeanor reckless endangerment is a lesser included offense of first degree murder in the perpetration of aggravated child abuse; and (2) whether the evidence is sufficient to support the conviction. Defendant Fleming contends that the trial court erred in its failure to grant (1) his pretrial motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action; and (2) his motion for judgment of acquittal for failure to “present sufficient facts to constitute felony murder.” After review, we affirm the defendants’ judgments of conviction.
State vs. Carl McIntosh - W2006-01074-CCA-R3-PC View
Madison County - The petitioner, Carl McIntosh, was convicted of one count of selling 0.5 gram or more of cocaine (Class B felony), one count of delivering 0.5 gram of cocaine (Class B felony), and two counts of simple possession (Class A misdemeanor). The convictions for selling and delivery were merged, and the counts of simple possession were merged. He was sentenced to twelve years in the Department of Correction for the Class B felony and to eleven months and twenty-nine days for the Class A misdemeanor, to be served consecutively to the Class B felony for a total effective sentence of twelve years, eleven months, and twenty-nine days. He appealed, and a panel of this court affirmed his convictions. State v. Carl McIntosh, No. W2003-02359-CCA-R3-CD, 2005 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 303, at *1 (Tenn. Crim. App. at Jackson, Mar. 30, 2005), perm. app. denied (Tenn. Aug. 29, 2005). Here, he appeals the post-conviction court’s denial of relief and contends that trial counsel was ineffective. The petitioner specifically contends that counsel did not meet with him prior to trial, failed to adequately investigate the confidential informant, failed to discuss the petitioner’s testimony with him prior to trial, and failed to object to a Tennessee Bureau of Investigation (TBI) forensic report used at trial. After review, we affirm the judgment from the post-conviction court.
State vs. Anthony Allen - W2006-01080-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - The defendant, Anthony Allen, was convicted in 2002 of seven counts of aggravated robbery, eight counts of aggravated rape, and one count of facilitation of aggravated rape which the trial court merged with one of the rape convictions, and received an effective sentence of 124 years. In State v. Anthony Allen, No. W2004-01085-CCA-R3-CD, 2005 WL 1606350, at *1 (Tenn. Crim. App. July 8, 2005), perm. to appeal denied (Tenn. Dec. 19, 2005), this court reversed one of the convictions for aggravated rape, remanding it for a new trial, and affirmed all of the remaining convictions but remanded the matter for a new sentencing hearing to determine whether consecutive sentencing was appropriate. Following the reconsideration by the trial court and the defendant’s being sentenced to an effective sentence of 104 years, the defendant appeals, arguing that the trial court erred in finding that he was a dangerous offender and that his criminal activity was extensive. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State Chester Cole - W2006-02138-CCA-R3-PC View
Madison County - The petitioner, Chester Floyd Cole, appeals the denial of his motion to reopen his post-conviction petition, arguing that newly discovered evidence of his rape victim’s medical examination would have altered the outcome of his trial. Following our review, we dismiss the appeal.
State vs. Eldridge Hill - W2006-01942-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - The defendant, Eldridge Hill, was convicted by a Shelby County jury of especially aggravated robbery, a Class A felony, and sentenced by the trial court as a violent offender to sixteen years at 100% in the Department of Correction. The sole issue he raises on appeal is whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain his conviction. Specifically, he argues that the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that his robbery victim suffered a serious bodily injury. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Jasper Vick - W2006-01606-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - The defendant, Jasper L. Vick, appeals his sentencing classification as a Range II offender, arguing that the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the criminal conduct leading to his South Carolina conviction for aggravated assault of a high and aggravated nature would have constituted a Class C felony in Tennessee. Following our review, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand for the defendant to be sentenced as a Range I offender.
State vs. Tyrone Walker - W2006-02035-CCA-R3-PC View
Fayette County - The petitioner, Tyrone A. Walker, appeals the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief, arguing that his guilty pleas were unknowing and involuntary and that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to request an independent psychological examination. Following our review, we affirm the denial of the petition.
State vs. Mack Jones - W2005-00014-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - Following a jury trial, Defendant, Mack Jones, was convicted of one count of first degree murder and nine counts of attempted first degree murder. Defendant was sentenced to life in prison for the first degree murder conviction and twenty-two years for each of the nine counts of attempted first degree murder, with all sentences to be served concurrently. Defendant filed a motion for new trial which the trial court subsequently denied. In this appeal, Defendant argues that (1) the evidence was insufficient to support Defendant’s convictions for first degree murder and attempted first degree murder, and (2) the trial court erred in admitting evidence of ammunition discovered from Defendant’s residence; admitting testimony that the photo line up contained a “juvenile photo” of Defendant; and excluding testimony that Defendant received a social security disability stipend and had difficulty counting money. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.
Gary Jordan vs. Howard Carlton, Warden - E2006-00206-CCA-R3-HC View
Johnson County - The petitioner, Gary Jordan, appeals the Johnson County Criminal Court’s denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus. The petitioner alleges that his sentences for second degree murder and attempted second degree murder were imposed illegally because the trial court ordered them to be served concurrent with a prior unserved sentence for which he was on probation and because he was on bond for probation violations at the time of the commission of the new offenses. The trial court found that the petition failed to state a cognizable claim for relief upon which a petition for a writ of habeas corpus could issue. Following our review, we affirm the trial court’s dismissal of the petition for habeas corpus relief.
State vs. Larry Arnold - M2006-01287-CCA-R3-CD View
Davidson County - The defendant, Larry Arnold, appeals as of right from his conviction of burglary for which he received a sentence of seven years imprisonment as a Range II, multiple offender. In this appeal, the defendant challenges the sufficiency of the convicting evidence and the length of his sentence. Following our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the defendant’s conviction and sentence.
Kristi Kimbro vs. State - M2006-00554-CCA-R3-PC View
Davidson County - The petitioner, Kristi Kimbro, pled guilty to second degree murder and was sentenced to thirty-seven years imprisonment. She now appeals the denial of her petition for post-conviction relief, arguing that she received the ineffective assistance of counsel which caused her to enter an unknowing and involuntary plea. Following our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the denial of post-conviction relief.
State vs. Lisa Ann Hudson - M2006-01051-CCA-R9-CO View
Bedford County - The defendant, Lisa Ann Hudson, was indicted for the aggravated child abuse and neglect, see Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-15-402, of her unborn fetus. Thereafter, the defendant filed a motion to dismiss the indictment on the ground it did not state a criminal offense, which the trial court denied. This Rule 9 interlocutory appeal followed for this court to determine whether the trial court erred in denying the defendant’s motion to dismiss. Following our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and dismiss the indictment.
State vs. Marquerite L. Tibbs - M2006-01161-CCA-R3-CD View
Giles County - Defendant, Marquerite L. Tibbs, was charged with two counts of vehicular homicide, one count of possession of marijuana, and one count of driving on a revoked license. Each count of vehicular homicide involved the same victim, but alleged different theories of guilt. On February 16, 2005, Defendant pled guilty to one count of vehicular homicide and one count of possession of marijuana. In exchange for her plea, Defendant received eight years for the vehicular homicide conviction and eleven months, twenty nine days for the possession conviction, with the manner of service to be determined by the trial court. An order of nolle prosequi was entered as to the remaining counts of vehicular homicide and driving on a revoked license. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced Defendant to serve eight years in the Department of Correction for the vehicular homicide conviction and eleven months, twenty-nine days for the possession conviction, to be served concurrently. On appeal, Defendant argues that the trial court erred in denying alternative sentencing. After a thorough review of the record, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand the case for resentencing.
State vs. Patrick C. Slay - M2006-02114-CCA-R3-CD View
Davidson County - Following a jury trial, Defendant, Patrick C. Slay, was convicted of driving under the influence of alcohol. The trial court suspended Defendant’s driver’s license for one year, ordered Defendant to attend an alcohol and drug treatment program, and sentenced him to 11 months, 29 days, with all suspended except 48 hours, and the balance served on probation. Defendant filed a motion for new trial which the trial court subsequently denied. On appeal, Defendant argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion for new trial because the trial court erred in admitting testimony that the Intoxilyzer 1400 (BAC machine) was working properly at the time of the arrest. After a review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Robert Franklin Delzell, III - M206-01822-CCA-R3-CD View
Stewart County - The defendant, Robert Franklin Delzell, III, appeals from the judgment of the Stewart County Circuit Court, revoking his community corrections sentence and imposing confinement. Following our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Ladarius L. Reffegee - M2005-02891-CCA-R3-CD View
Davidson County - The defendant, Ladarius L. Reffegee, was convicted by jury of second degree murder and carrying a handgun with intent to go armed. Subsequently, the defendant pled guilty to possession of cocaine with the reservation of a certified question of law for appeal. For his convictions, the defendant received a total effective sentence of twenty-three years imprisonment. In this appeal, the defendant contends that: (1) his motion to suppress evidence should have been granted because his vehicle was subjected to an unlawful search by law enforcement; (2) the state violated his due process rights by failing to divulge evidence favorable to the defense; and (3) the state’s comment on the defendant’s failure to produce a witness violated his due process rights. Following our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.
Phillip R. Holden vs. State - M2006-01370-CCA-R3-PC View
Davidson County - The petitioner, Phillip R. Holden, appeals the Davidson County Criminal Court’s denying him post-conviction relief from his 2004 conviction for possession of one-half gram or more of cocaine with the intent to sell, a Class B felony, and resulting ten-year sentence. On appeal, the petitioner contends that he received the ineffective assistance of counsel, rendering his guilty pleas unknowing and involuntary. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Arthur Pirtle - M2006-02283-CCA-R3-CD View
Marshall County - In May 2005, the defendant, Arthur Pirtle, was indicted by a Marshall County grand jury on one count of possession of more than .5 gram of a Schedule II Controlled Substance (cocaine), a Class B felony, and one count of Simple Possession, a Class A misdemeanor. In June 2006, a jury trial was held in Marshall County Circuit Court. At the conclusion of the trial, the defendant was convicted of possession of a Schedule II controlled substance but acquitted on the simple possession charge. At the sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced the defendant to twenty-seven years in prison as a Range III, persistent offender. On appeal, the defendant contends that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction. After reviewing the record, we conclude that the evidence was sufficient to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt and therefore affirm the ruling of the trial court.
Perry Singo vs. State - M2006-01986-CCA-R3-PC View
Dickson County - In March 2000 the petitioner, Perry Singo, was convicted in Dickson County Circuit Court of four counts of rape of a child and four counts of aggravated sexual battery. The petitioner was sentenced to the maximum sentence on each count, with two of the child rape counts to run consecutively and all other counts to run concurrently, resulting in an effective sentence of fifty years. On direct appeal, this court reversed three of the child rape convictions and remanded to the trial court for re-sentencing. State v. Perry Singo, No. M2001-00919-CCA-R3-CD, 2002 WL 1838142, at *1 (Tenn. Crim. App. at Nashville, Aug. 9, 2002) (Perry Singo I). On remand, the trial court ran two of the aggravated sexual battery counts consecutive to the remaining child rape count, resulting in an effective sentence of forty-nine years. This court affirmed the trial court’s revised judgment. State v. Perry Singo, No. M2003-01230-CCA-R3-CD, 2004 WL 343968, at *1 (Tenn. Crim. App. at Nashville, Feb. 24, 2004) (Perry Singo II). The petitioner then filed a petition for post-conviction relief. A hearing was held in the trial court in May 2006, and the trial court denied the petition in June 2006. The petitioner appeals, alleging judicial vindictiveness on the part of the trial court in imposing its second sentence, as well as ineffective assistance of counsel. After reviewing the record, we affirm the ruling of the trial court.
State vs. Tamelia Pope Ortel - M2006-01890-CCA-R3-CD View
Bedford County - In May 2006, the defendant, Tamelia Pope Ortel, was indicted by a Bedford County grand jury on seventy-four counts of forgery, with the amounts of the forged instruments (all less than $500) rendering the offenses Class E felonies. In July 2006, the defendant pled guilty to all counts of the indictment. The trial court sentenced the defendant to the maximum term of two years in prison as a Range I, standard offender, on each count, running most of the terms concurrently but some consecutively, resulting in an effective sentence of eight years. The defendant’s sole issue on appeal is that the trial court erred in refusing to impose an alternate sentence. We conclude that the trial court properly sentenced the defendant and thus affirm the ruling of the trial court.
Harvey Webster vs. State - M2006-00886-CCA-R3-PC View
Davidson County - The petitioner, Harvey Webster, appeals as of right the Davidson County Criminal Court’s denial of his petition for post-conviction relief challenging his guilty pleas to especially aggravated kidnapping and aggravated robbery. Additionally, he appeals the effective sentence of twenty-five years as a Range I, standard offender received as a result of his guilty pleas from which the trial court granted a delayed appeal pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-30-113. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
David Lamar Hayes vs. State - M2006-01044-CCA-R3-PC View
Rutherford County - The petitioner, David Lamar Hayes, pro se, appeals as of right from the Rutherford County Criminal Court’s denial of post-conviction relief. The petitioner was convicted of thirteen counts of rape of a child and seven counts of rape and received an effective sentence of 220 years. On direct appeal, this court affirmed all of the convictions except for one count of rape, which was dismissed, and reduced his total effective sentence to sixty-six years. State v. David Lamar Hayes, M2002-01331-CCA-R3-CD, 2004 WL 1778478 (Tenn. Crim. App. Aug. 9, 2004), perm. app. denied (Tenn. May 23, 2005). On January 10, 2006, the petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief that alleged a wide range of allegations regarding ineffective assistance of counsel and state misconduct. After numerous amendments, the appointment of counsel and a full and thorough evidentiary hearing, the post-conviction court denied post-conviction relief. In this appeal, he contends that the post-conviction court erroneously denied relief. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.
State vs. Greg Southall - M2006-01738-CCA-R3-CD View
Maury County - The defendant, Greg Southall, was charged with possession of one-half gram or more of cocaine with the intent to sell and possession of marijuana. The trial court granted the defendant’s motion to suppress the drugs, finding that the search of the defendant’s vehicle was unconstitutional. The state appeals the suppression. We hold that suppression was proper, and we affirm the trial court’s judgment.
Joseph Miles vs. State, Ricky Bell, Warden - M2006-02088-CCA-R3-HC View
Davidson County - This matter is before the Court upon the State’s motion to affirm the judgment of the habeas corpus court by memorandum opinion pursuant to Rule 20 of the Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals. Petitioner has appealed the habeas corpus court’s order summarily dismissing the petition for writ of habeas corpus. Upon a review of the record in this case, we are persuaded that the habeas corpus court was correct in summarily dismissing the habeas corpus petition and that this case meets the criteria for affirmance pursuant to Rule 20 of the Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals. Accordingly, the State’s motion is granted and the judgment of the habeas corpus court is affirmed.
State vs. Gregory N. Boykin - M2006-01777-CCA-R3-CD View
Rutherford County - A Rutherford County jury convicted the Defendant, Gregory N. Boykin, of filing a false police report, theft under five hundred dollars, and vandalism under five hundred dollars. On appeal, he alleges that: (1) the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction for filing a false police report; and (2) that the trial court improperly admitted evidence of the Defendant’s prior convictions. Because we conclude that no error exists, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.
State of Tennessee v. Anthony Tyrone Robertson - M2006-01679-CCA-R3-CD View
Montgomery County - The Defendant, Anthony Tyrone Robertson, appeals from the order of the Montgomery County Circuit Court revoking his probation. In July of 2000, the Defendant pled guilty to sexual battery and received a six-year sentence as a Range III, persistent offender. The sentence was suspended following service of one year in the county jail, and the Defendant was placed on probation. On July 16, 2004, a warrant was issued, wherein it was alleged that the Defendant violated the conditions of his probation. The warrant was twice amended to include additional violations. After a hearing, the trial court concluded that the Defendant violated the conditions of his probationary sentence and ordered that his original six-year sentence to the Department of Correction be reinstated. On appeal, the Defendant argues that the trial court abused its discretion by revoking his probation and ordering that the remainder of his sentence be served in confinement. After a review of the record, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
George T. Haynie v. Ricky Bell, Warden and State of Tennessee - M2006-02752-CCA-R3-HC View
Davidson County - The Petitioner, George T. Haynie, Jr., appeals the denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The Petitioner, serving a sentence of nine years for two convictions for passing worthless checks, alleges that his judgments of conviction are void because (1) the affidavit in support of the arrest warrant failed to disclose that the Petitioner had made partial payment towards the debt, (2) the indictment failed to make any reference to written notice, (3) accepting partial payment from the Petitioner constituted an election to pursue the matter civilly, and (4) the State engaged in prosecutorial misconduct. After a review of the record and the applicable law, we affirm the judgment of the habeas corpus court.
Cases posted the week of 06/18/2007
Jeremy Wayne Pittard v. State of Tennessee - M2006-01834-CCA-R3-PC View
Rutherford County - Petitioner, Jeremy Wayne Pittard, was indicted on one count of rape of a child, a Class A felony. Petitioner entered a best interest plea to the offense of attempted rape of a child, a Class B felony, and agreed to a sentence of twelve years as a Range I standard offender. Petitioner argues on appeal that the trial court erred in denying him post-conviction relief. After a thorough review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.
State of Tennessee v. Darrin R. Sheffield - M2006-00919-CCA-R3-CD View
Humphreys County - Defendant, Darrin R. Sheffield, pled guilty to charges of possession of methamphetamine and promotion of the manufacturing of methamphetamine. He was sentenced to serve five years for the possession conviction and three years for the manufacturing conviction, to be served concurrently for a total effective sentence of five years. Prior to the guilty plea, Defendant moved the court to suppress evidence taken during the traffic stop which led to Defendant’s arrest. The motion was denied, and the resulting plea was taken subject to the appeal of a certified question of law. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Jeremy Wayne Pittard v. State of Tennessee - M2006-01834-CCA-R3-PC View
Willie L. Hicks v. State of Tennessee, Cherry Lindawood, Warden - M2006-01640-CCA-R3-PC View
Wayne County - Petitioner, Willie L. Hicks, appeals the circuit court’s summary dismissal of his second pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus. Following our review of the parties’ briefs and applicable law, we dismiss the appeal.
Calvin Lewis Hill v. State of Tennessee - M2006-00666-CCA-R3-PC View
Marshall County - The Petitioner, Calvin Lewis Hill, was convicted of car jacking, theft of property valued over $1000.00, and forgery, and his convictions were affirmed on direct appeal. He petitioned for post-conviction relief claiming that he had received the ineffective assistance of counsel at trial. The post-conviction court dismissed the post-conviction petition, and we affirm that judgment.
Joey Salcido v. State of Tennessee - M2007-00166-CCA-R3-HC View
Wayne County- The Petitioner, Joey Salcido, filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The habeas court denied relief, and the Petitioner filed a timely notice of appeal. On appeal, the Petitioner contends that the habeas corpus court erred because: (1) the trial court lacked jurisdiction to convict him because of a defective indictment; and (2) the delay in the disposition of his post-conviction petition has deprived him of due process of law. Finding no error, we affirm the judgment of the habeas court.
State of Tennessee v. Mark Ammons - M2006-00286-CCA-R3-CD View
Davidson County - Defendant, Mark A. Ammons, was indicted on one count of assault, a Class A misdemeanor, and one count of theft of property less than $500.00, a Class A misdemeanor. After a bench trial, Defendant was found guilty of the offense of assault and not guilty of theft of property. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced Defendant for his assault conviction to thirty days to be served in the county workhouse. On appeal, Defendant argues that (1) the evidence is insufficient to support his assault conviction; (2) the trial court erred in permitting the State to amend the indictment after jeopardy attached; and (3) the trial court erred in not sustaining Defendant’s objection to the introduction of hearsay evidence. After a thorough review, we conclude that the trial court erred in allowing the State to amend count one of the indictment without Defendant’s consent after jeopardy attached, but that such error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. We therefore affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. William Thomas Heckart - E2006-01961-CCA-R3-CD View
Sullivan County - The defendant, William Thomas Heckart, pled guilty in the Sullivan County Criminal Court to reckless endangerment, a Class E felony; two counts of aggravated assault, a Class C felony; misdemeanor violation of the sex offender registry, a Class A misdemeanor; and felony violation of the sex offender registry, a Class E felony, and was sentenced as a Range I offender to an effective six-year sentence in the Department of Correction. On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred in denying his request for probation or other alternative sentencing. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court but remand for entry of a corrected judgment form in count two of case number S50,856 to reflect that the conviction offense was a Class C felony.
Phillip Pye v. State of Tennessee - M2006-01504-CCA-R3-PC View
Maury County - Petitioner, Phillip O’Brian Pye, appeals the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. On appeal, Petitioner contends that (1) trial counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel during the negotiation and entry of his pleas of guilty; and (2) his guilty pleas were not voluntarily or knowingly entered into because he was under the influence of a drug and because his counsel rendered ineffective assistance of counsel. After a thorough review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.
State of Tennessee v. Betty Chumbley - M2006-01117-CCA-R3-CD View
Marshall County - The defendant, Betty R. Chumbley, pled guilty to two counts of theft between $10,000 and $60,000, a Class C felony; three counts of official misconduct, a Class E felony; and one count of destruction of and tampering with governmental records, a Class A misdemeanor. The theft counts were merged and the official misconduct counts were merged. She received an effective five-year sentence on probation. On appeal, the defendant contends that the trial court erred in denying her judicial diversion. We affirm the judgments of the trial court.
State of Tennessee v. Timmy Lee Hill - M2005-02437-CCA-R3-CD View
Marshall County - A Marshall County Circuit Court jury convicted the appellant, Timmy Lee Hill, of three counts of aggravated kidnapping, two counts of aggravated assault, one count of escape, and one count of evading arrest. The trial court merged the aggravated kidnapping convictions and ordered that the appellant serve an effective forty-year sentence in confinement for all of the convictions. On appeal, the appellant contends that (1) the trial court erred by overruling his Batson challenges during jury selection; (2) the trial court erred by overruling his objection to the State’s improper attempt to impeach a defense witness; (3) the evidence is insufficient to support his aggravated kidnapping and aggravated assault convictions; and (4) the trial court improperly sentenced him as a career offender for some of the offenses. Based upon the record and the parties’ briefs, we conclude that the evidence is insufficient to support one of the appellant’s aggravated assault convictions because the evidence does not show that the victim suffered serious bodily injury. Therefore, the appellant’s conviction for that offense is modified to misdemeanor assault, and the case is remanded to the trial court for resentencing as to that offense. The case is also remanded in order for the trial court to reconsider consecutive sentencing and to make several corrections to the judgments. The judgments of the trial court are affirmed in all other respects.
Joseph E. Suggs, III v. State of Tennessee - M2006-00485-CCA-R3-PC View
Davidson County - The petitioner, Joseph Edward Suggs, III, pled guilty in the Davidson County Criminal Court to three counts of rape of a child, and he received a total effective sentence of seventy-five years. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief, alleging that his trial counsel were ineffective and that his guilty pleas were not knowingly and voluntarily entered. The post-conviction court denied the petition, and the petitioner appeals. Upon review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.
Bobby James Mosley v. State of Tennessee - M2006-02398-CCA-R3-HC View
Hickman County - The Appellant, Bobby James Mosley, proceeding pro se, appeals the Hickman County Circuit Court’s summary dismissal of his petition for writ of habeas corpus. In September, 2004, Mosley was convicted by a Marshall County jury of aggravated robbery and was sentenced to twelve years in the Department of Correction. On appeal, Mosley argues that his judgment of conviction is void for the following reasons: (1) the trial court falsely stated that his trial had been severed from a co-defendant’s; (2) he was tried in a joint trial and acquitted, but the verdict forms were altered; and (3) his second trial for the same offense, in September, 2004, violated his constitutional protection against double jeopardy. Finding that Mosley is not entitled to relief, we affirm the dismissal of the petition.
State vs. Rashad Chandler - W2006-02130-CCA-R3-PC View
Shelby County - The petitioner, Rashad Jamal Chandler, appeals the Shelby County Criminal Court’s denial of his petition for post-conviction relief from his conviction for first degree premeditated murder and resulting life sentence. He contends that he received the ineffective assistance of counsel because his trial attorney (1) failed to interview witnesses who would have helped his case and (2) should have argued a different theory of defense. Based upon the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the post-conviction court’s denial of the petition for post-conviction relief.
State vs. Carri Lane - W2005-01998-CCA-R3-CD View
Dissenting Opinion - View
Shelby County - The Appellant, Carri Chandler Lane, appeals the Shelby County Criminal Court’s denial of her motion to modify court-ordered restitution. The State responds that the denial of a request to modify restitution is not appealable under Tenn. R. App. P. 3(b), and, even if appealable, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion. While we agree that Rule 3(b) does not provide for an appeal as of right from a trial court’s denial of a motion to modify restitution, we, nonetheless, conclude that the Appellant’s issues are entitled to a review as the appeal may be treated as a writ of certiorari. See T.C.A. § 27-8-101 (2006). After review of the Appellant’s motion on the merits, we conclude that material changes in circumstances have occurred since the order and, further, that it would be unjust to require adherence to the restitution order currently in effect. Accordingly, the trial court’s order denying modification is reversed, and this case is remanded for a hearing to determine, following consideration of the Appellant’s present financial resources and her future ability to pay or perform, the proper amount and method of payment of restitution to be made. See T.C.A. § 40-35-304(d) (2006).
State vs. Latarsha Wheeler - W2006-01001-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - The defendant, Latarsha R. Wheeler, was convicted of theft of property valued at $1,000 or more, but less than $10,000, a Class D felony, for money stolen from her employer, Back Yard Burgers. See T.C.A. § 39-14-105(3). The defendant was sentenced as a Range I offender to three years with forty days of periodic confinement in the workhouse coupled with probation. In this appeal, we consider her claims of error due to insufficient corroboration of accomplice testimony, lack of a jury charge on facilitation, denial of judicial diversion, and error in imposing the amount of restitution. We hold that the trial court did not err and affirm its judgment.
Cases posted the week of 06/11/2007
Jerome Williams vs. State - M2007-00164-CCA-R3-HC View
Wayne County - Petitioner, Jerome Williams, filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus in the Circuit Court of Wayne County. Upon motion of the State, the trial court summarily dismissed the petition without a hearing and without appointment of counsel for Petitioner. Petitioner has appealed, arguing that the trial court erred by failing to appoint counsel, and by summarily dismissing the petition. The State has filed a motion pursuant to Rule 20 of the Rules of the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals, to affirm the judgment of the trial court in a memorandum opinion. Having reviewed the entire record, we grant the State’s motion. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
State vs. Hollis Williams - W2006-00779-CCA-MR3-PC View
Shelby County - The petitioner, Hollis G. Williams, who is serving a life sentence without possibility of parole for first degree murder, appeals from the Shelby County Criminal Court’s denial of his petition for post-conviction relief and motion to reopen his prior post-conviction proceedings. We hold that we are without jurisdiction to consider the petitioner’s appeal from the trial court’s denial of the motion to reopen. We also hold that we have jurisdiction to consider the trial court’s denial of relief on the petitioner’s other post-conviction claims, and we affirm its judgment on those claims.
State vs. Joshua Glenn Trivette - E2006-00129-CCA-R3-CD View
Sullivan County - The defendant, Joshua Glenn Trivette, pled guilty to two counts of auto burglary, theft over $1000, five counts of vandalism over $1000, vandalism over $500, felony evading arrest, driving under the influence, driving on a revoked license stemming from one indictment (Case No. S50,046), and to driving on a revoked license second offense, violation of the seat belt law, and failure to provide proof of financial responsibility from a separate indictment (Case No. S50,045), with the trial court to determine the length and manner of service. After a sentencing hearing, the trial court imposed a sentence of eleven months, twenty-nine days in Case No. S50,045 and an effective six-year sentence in Case No. S50,046, to be served consecutively in the Department of Correction. On appeal, the defendant contends that the trial court erred by misapplying enhancement and mitigating factors, ordering consecutive sentences, and denying an alternative sentence. After careful review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.
State vs. Caroline White - W2006-02580-CCA-R3-CD View
Chester County - The appellant, Caroline White, pled guilty to aggravated assault and robbery, and she received a total effective sentence of three years intensive probation. Subsequently, the trial court revoked the appellant’s probation and ordered her to serve her sentence in confinement. On appeal, the appellant challenges the revocation and argues that she should have been given another probationary sentence. Upon our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.
State vs. Keith D. Williams - M200y6-01830-CCA-R3-CD View
Davidson County - The defendant, Keith D. Williams, entered guilty pleas in the Criminal Court of Davidson County to sale of cocaine in an amount less that .5 grams in case number 2005-C-1660 and to sale of cocaine in an amount less than .5 grams in case number 2005-C-2147. He was sentenced to six years as a Range II, multiple offender for each count, to be served consecutively, for a total effective sentence of twelve years. The trial court ordered split confinement with the bulk of the defendant’s sentences to be served in the community corrections program. The defendant served a mere eleven days of his community corrections sentence when he was charged with violating the terms of his community corrections sentence. After a full hearing, the trial court found that the defendant had violated the terms of his community corrections sentence, revoked the sentence and resentenced the defendant to a term of eighteen years as a Range II, multiple offender to be served in the custody of the Department of Corrections. The defendant now appeals the revocation and resentencing. Following our review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.
State vs. Marco M. Northern - M2005-02336-CCA-R3-CD View
Davidson County - A Davidson County jury convicted the defendant, Marco M. Northern, of second degree murder, and the trial court imposed an incarcerative sentence of 24 years. On appeal, the defendant asserts (1) that his confession should have been suppressed because the arresting detectives deliberately employed a two-step interrogation technique that undermined and obscured the Miranda warnings that preceded his confession; (2) that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction; (3) that the trial court committed reversible error in permitting a witness to testify that shortly prior to the homicide, the defendant stated that he needed money and was planning to rob someone; (4) that the trial court’s jury instruction on flight and the permissible inferences flowing therefrom was prejudicially erroneous; and (5) that his sentence is excessive. After thoroughly reviewing the record, the parties’ briefs, and applicable authorities, we find that the interrogation technique did not circumvent the Miranda warnings given; that sufficient evidence supports the conviction; that no error occurred in the admission of evidence at trial; and that a jury instruction on flight was warranted. However, we conclude that the trial court erred in applying the 2005 Sentencing Act in the absence of a valid waiver of ex post facto rights. Accordingly, we affirm the defendant’s second degree murder conviction but reverse and remand the case for a new sentencing hearing.
State vs. Brandon Mobley - E2006-00469-CCA-R3-CD View
Knox County - The Defendant, Brandon Mobley, was convicted by a Knox County jury of two counts of first degree murder, especially aggravated robbery, and setting fire to personal property, and the trial court sentenced him to two consecutive life sentences plus twenty-two years. On appeal, he alleges: (1) there is insufficient evidence upon which to convict him on either count of first-degree murder; (2) there is insufficient evidence upon which to convict him of especially aggravated robbery; (3) the trial court erred in initially prohibiting testimony from a defense expert, which caused a violation of his Fifth Amendment rights; and (4) the trial court erred in sentencing him. After reviewing the record and applicable law, we affirm the Defendant’s convictions, but we conclude the Defendant was improperly sentenced. Thus, we modify the Defendant’s sentences for his convictions for especially aggravated robbery and setting fire to personal property from twenty to eighteen years and from two years to one year, respectively.
State vs. JoAnn Craddick - M2006-1435-CCA-R3-CD View
Hickman County - The Defendant, Joann Craddick, pled guilty to two counts of vehicular assault, and the trial court sentenced her to concurrent two year sentences for each conviction, with eight months to be served in jail, followed by supervised probation. On appeal, the Defendant contends that the trial court erred when it denied her full probation. Concluding that there exists no error, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.
State vs. James Anthony Anderson - M2006-01772-CCA-R3-CD View
Williamson County - The Defendant, James Anthony Anderson, appeals from the sentencing decision of the Williamson County Circuit Court. The Defendant was indicted for two counts of domestic assault and, subsequently, he pled guilty to one count of domestic assault. Pursuant to the terms of the plea agreement, he received an eight-month sentence, and the trial court was to determine the manner of service. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court ordered that the Defendant’s eight-month sentence be served in the county jail. On appeal, the Defendant argues that the trial court erred by ordering a sentence of confinement rather than a less restrictive alternative. Finding no error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Kamiko T. Clark - M2006-00819-CCA-R3-CD View
Davidson County - A Davidson County jury convicted the Defendant, Kamiko T. Clark, of six counts of child abuse, a class A misdemeanor. On appeal, the Defendant alleges that the trial court erred when it: (1) allowed her statement to the police into evidence; (2) refused to merge her three child abuse convictions for each victim into one conviction for each victim; and (3) imposed sentences that were consecutive and involved partial confinement. Following review, the judgments of conviction are affirmed. However, because the trial court failed to make findings of fact with regard to consecutive sentencing, we remand the case to the trial court for a determination of whether consecutive sentencing is warranted in this case.
State vs. Hershel Wayne Grimes - M2006-01531-CCA-R3-CD View
Grundy County - A Grundy County jury convicted the Defendant, Hershel Wayne Grimes, of first degree murder, and he was sentenced to life in prison. On appeal, the Defendant contends that: (1) the evidence is insufficient to sustain his conviction; (2) at trial, the State presented testimony it knew to be false; (3) the trial court improperly excluded testimony about the victim’s prior bad acts; (4) the trial court erred when it excluded testimony about the mental stability of two prosecution witnesses; (5) the trial court erred when it allowed the State to question a defense witness about her prior marriages; (6) the trial court erred when it did not admit as substantive evidence the prior statements of a State witness; (7) the trial court erred when it allowed the State to cross-examine the Defendant about a previous statement; (8) the cumulative effect of these errors requires that the conviction be reversed. Finding that there exists no reversible error, we affirm the judgment of the court.
Cases posted the week of 06/04/2007
State vs. Howard Coleman - W2006-02601-CCA-R3-PC View
Shelby County - The Appellant, Howard Lee Coleman, appeals the judgment of the Shelby County Criminal Court denying post-conviction relief. Coleman was convicted of first degree murder and especially aggravated robbery and was sentenced by the jury to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. He also received a concurrent sentence of twenty years for his especially aggravated robbery conviction. Coleman filed a pro se petition for post-conviction relief in 2001, alleging multiple deficiencies underlying his ineffective assistance of counsel claim, including the failure to perfect a direct appeal of his convictions. After the appointment of counsel, the post-conviction court heard evidence on all the allegations and granted a Rule 3 delayed appeal to this court. The remaining post-conviction issues were stayed pending the outcome of the appeal, which was subsequently denied. Following the denial of second tier review, Coleman, proceeding pro se, filed an amended post-conviction petition in 2005. The attorney appointed to represent Coleman in his post-conviction challenge was the same attorney appointed to him in the direct appeal of the case. The post-conviction court subsequently denied post-conviction relief. On appeal, Coleman argues that he was denied his Sixth Amendment right to the effective assistance of counsel, specifically arguing that trial counsel was ineffective by failing to properly investigate and prepare the case. Following review, the judgment of the post-conviction court is affirmed with regard to all allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel at trial. However, plain error review of the record reveals an actual conflict of interest in that counsel appointed to perfect the direct appeal was also appointed to represent the Appellant in the amended portion of the post-conviction proceeding. Because the record is silent with regard to the conflict of interest issue, we vacate the judgment and remand for a determination of whether the Appellant was informed of the conflict and, after full disclosure, consented to the representation of appointed post-conviction counsel for purposes of the amended proceedings. If waiver is found, the post-conviction court shall enter an order accordingly and reinstate the original judgment. However, if the court finds that no waiver occurred, the court shall appoint new post-conviction counsel for the limited purpose of allowing Coleman to amend his post-conviction petition to include any issues which resulted from the unsuccessful delayed appeal. See Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 28 § (9)(D)(b)(3)(a).
State vs. Corey Finley - W2005-02804-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - A Shelby County jury convicted the defendant, Corey Finley, of attempted first degree premeditated murder, see T.C.A. § 39-12-101 (2006); id. § 39-13-202(a)(1), and aggravated assault, see id. § 39-13-102. The court sentenced him to serve 23 years in the Department of Correction as a Range I, standard offender for the attempted first degree murder conviction and merged the aggravated assault finding of guilt. Aggrieved of his convictions, the defendant appeals on four grounds: (1) that there was insufficient evidence to convict him of attempted first degree murder; (2) that the trial court erred in failing to fully charge the jury on circumstantial evidence; (3) that the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury on all lesser included offenses; and (4) that the sentence was excessive. After reviewing the record, we hold that the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendant of attempted first degree murder. We also hold that the defendant waived the two jury instruction issues and hold that the trial court did not commit plain error by not instructing the jury more fully on the circumstantial-evidence-jury-instruction issue. Finally, we hold that the sentence was not excessive. Thus, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Rickey Hogan - W2006-01337-CCA-R3-CO View
Shelby County - Following the failure of two writs of habeas corpus to alter his sentence, Appellant filed a Motion to Correct Clerical Error pursuant to Rule 36 of the Tennessee Rules of Criminal Procedure. The trial court dismissed his motion because it was too vague and did not allege an intelligible and colorable claim. This Court dismisses the appeal because there is no appeal as of right from a Motion to Correct Clerical Error.
State vs. Tommy Holmes - W2006-00236-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - The defendant, Tommy L. Holmes, was convicted of aggravated rape, a Class A felony, and sentenced as a violent offender to twenty-four years in the Department of Correction. He presents six issues on appeal: (1) whether he forfeited his right to counsel; (2) whether the jury was properly instructed on lesser-included offenses; (3) whether the evidence was sufficient to establish the bodily injury element of aggravated rape; (4) whether the trial court erred in answering the jury’s question regarding what constitutes bodily injury; (5) whether there was prosecutorial misconduct during closing argument; and (6) whether the trial court erred by excluding certain evidence the defendant offered. Following our review, we conclude that his claims are without merit. However, we additionally conclude that, before determining that the defendant had forfeited his right to counsel, the trial court should have conducted an evidentiary hearing. Accordingly, we remand to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing as to this claim.
State vs. Eric Lumkpins - W2005-02805-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - The defendant, Eric Lumpkins, appeals from his Shelby County Criminal Court jury convictions of first degree murder, attempt to commit first degree murder, and two counts of aggravated assault. He challenges the sufficiency of the convicting evidence, the selection of the trial jury, the admission and exclusion of evidence, prosecutorial remarks made during closing argument, and his aggregate sentence of life plus ten years. We hold, inter alia, that the convicting evidence is legally sufficient and, in so holding, decline to apply the physical facts rule, and we hold that consecutive sentencing may be imposed by the trial judge without the participation of a jury. We affirm the judgments of the trial court.
State vs. Dennis Brian Davis - E2005-02505-CCA-R3-CD View
Cumberland County - The defendant, Dennis Brian Davis, appeals his Cumberland County Criminal Court jury conviction of manufacturing methamphetamine, a schedule II controlled substance, within 1,000 feet of a school. See T.C.A. §§ 39-17-417(a)(1), (c)(2),- 432 (2006). In his timely appeal, he claims that the evidence was legally insufficient to support the verdict. We disagree and affirm the criminal court’s judgment.
State vs. Donald Luke Seiber - E2006-00816-CCA-R3-CD View
Knox County - The defendant, Donald Luke Seiber, was convicted by a Knox County Criminal Court jury of aggravated kidnapping, aggravated assault, and two counts of sexual battery. The defendant appealed. The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed his convictions but remanded for a new sentencing hearing because adequate findings were not made to support an effective sentence of 16 years. Upon remand, the trial court again imposed sentences of two years each for sexual battery in counts one and two, ten years for aggravated kidnapping in court three, and four years for aggravated assault in court four, for an effective 16-year sentence based on the existence of multiple enhancement factors and because the defendant was a “dangerous offender.” The defendant again appealed. Our de novo review reveals that Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004), was decided prior to the defendant’s first sentencing hearing, and the defendant then began his Sixth Amendment challenge to Tennessee’s sentencing scheme and the trial court’s authority to enhance his sentence beyond that authorized by the jury’s verdicts. Because Blakely and its progeny are controlling, we reverse the trial court’s sentencing determinations and modify the defendant’s sentences for an effective sentence of 15 years, with specific findings that the defendant is a “dangerous offender” who merits consecutive sentencing.
State vs. Jermaine R. Wiseman - M2006-00400-CCA-R3-CD View
Davidson County - The Appellant, Jermaine R. Wiseman, was convicted by a Davidson County jury of Class B felony possesion of cocaine, Class E felony possesion of marijuana, and misdemeanor possesion of drug paraphernalia. On appeal, Wiseman raises two issues for our review: (1) whether the trial court erred in denying his special request for a jury instruction with regard to the “allowable inference” a jury is permitted to make based upon the amount of the controlled substance possessed “in a possession for resale case” and (2) whether the evidence is sufficient to support his felony drug convictions. Finding no error, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
State vs. Larry D. Daniel - M2006-01670-CCA-R3-CD View
Davidson County - The appellant, Larry D. Daniel, pled guilty in the Davidson County Criminal Court to possession of a Schedule VI controlled substance with intent to sell and being a felon in possession of a weapon and received an effective two-year alternative sentence. Subsequently, the trial court revoked his probation and ordered that he serve his effective sentence in confinement. On appeal, the appellant claims that the trial court erred by revoking his probation. Upon review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.
State vs. Grady Lee Flippo - M2006-01182-CCA-R3-CD View
Bedford County- The Defendant, Grady Lee Flippo, was convicted by a Bedford County jury of two counts of attempted aggravated assault, Class D felonies. For these convictions, the Defendant received sentences of three years and three years and six months to be served consecutively in the Department of Correction. In this appeal as of right, the Defendant presents the following issues for our review: (1) whether the evidence justified a jury instruction on the lesser-included offense of attempt; (2) whether the trial court erred by instructing the jury that attempted aggravated assault and simple assault were “equal in seriousness”; (3) whether the trial court erroneously applied an enhancement factor, i.e., the Defendant had no hesitation about committing a crime when the risk to human life was high; (4) whether the trial court erred in ordering consecutive sentences based on the factor that the Defendant was a dangerous offender; and (5) whether consecutive sentencing violated his right to a jury trial as set forth in Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 (2004). Following a review of the record, we affirm the judgments of the trial court concerning the Defendant’s convictions and the lengths of the Defendant’s sentences. Because we conclude that the trial court improperly classified the Defendant as a dangerous offender, we reverse the trial court’s order of consecutive sentencing and remand for modification of the sentences to reflect concurrent terms.
Michael R. Martin vs. State - M2006-01371-CCA-R3-PC View
Davidson County - The petitioner, Michael R. Martin, appeals the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief, arguing his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to adequately confer with him before trial and for failing to object to the State’s improper rebuttal argument. Following our review, we affirm the denial of the petition.
State vs. Kenneth Threalkill - M2006-00555-CCA-R3-CD View
Davidson County - The appellant, Kenneth Threalkill, pled guilty in the Davidson County Criminal Court to one count of aggravated robbery, four counts of robbery, and one count of aggravated assault, and he received a total effective sentence of twenty-one years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the appellant challenges the trial court’s imposition of consecutive sentencing. Upon our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.
State vs. Richard Adam Hannah, Larry Darnell Penn, and Tracy Lee Ray - E2005-02833-CCA-R3-CD View
Hamilton County - The Hamilton County Grand Jury indicted defendants Richard Adam Hannah, Larry Darnell Penn, and Tracy Lee Ray, for possession of more than .5 grams of cocaine with intent to sell or deliver and possession of marijuana with intent to sell or deliver. Defendant Hannah was also charged with driving without a driver’s license. Defendant Penn and Defendant Ray filed a motion to suppress the evidence seized as a result of the search of their car following an unconstitutional stop. At the subsequent hearing, without objection of the State and with the trial court’s acquiescence, Defendant Hannah orally joined the motion. The trial court granted the motion to suppress and dismissed the State’s case. This appeal followed. On appeal, the State argues that the trial court erred in sustaining the motion to suppress evidence because the initial stop of the vehicle was legal. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Rod Mills - E2006-02207-CCA-R3-CD View
Sevier County - In January 2004, a Sevier County grand jury indicted the defendant, Rod Mills, on one count of theft over $10,000, a Class C felony. The defendant waived his right to a jury trial. In May 2006, a bench trial was held and the defendant was found guilty on the sole count of the indictment. The trial court sentenced the defendant to five years in prison as a Range I, standard offender. The defendant appeals, alleging that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction. We conclude that the evidence was insufficient to prove that the defendant possessed the requisite mental state and therefore reverse the judgment of the trial court and dismiss the case.
State vs. Frank Brzezowski - W2005-02619-CCA-R3-CD View
Benton County - The defendant, Frank Brzezowski, was convicted of two counts of aggravated assault and three counts of aggravated rape and was sentenced to an effective term of twenty-two years to be served at 100%. On appeal, he argues that: (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions; (2) the trial court erred in denying his motion for new trial; and (3) the trial court erred in its sentencing determination. Upon our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the defendant’s convictions, but remand for a new sentencing hearing.
State vs. Janice Burnette - W2006-01203-CCA-R3-CD View
Separate Concurring Opinion - View
Hardeman County - The defendant, Janice Burnette, was convicted of theft of property valued between $1,000 and $10,000, and was sentenced to three years, suspended after service of thirty days with the balance on probation. On appeal, she argues that: (1) there was a material and highly prejudicial variance between the indictment and the evidence presented at trial; (2) there was a material variance between the indictment and the jury charge; (3) the trial court erred in denying her request that the jury be instructed she was indicted for theft of pseudoephedrine not general merchandise; (4) the charge given to the jury was insufficient; (5) the indictment was flawed and the trial court cured it by giving the jury the general theft charge; (6) she was denied her 6th Amendment right to face her accusers and be adequately prepared to defend herself against the charge of theft of general merchandise; (7) the state did not meet its burden of proof as to theft of pseudoephedrine products; and (8) the state’s closing argument was improper. After our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Homer Rivers - W2006-01607-CCA-R3-PC View
Hardeman County - The petitioner, Homer T. Rivers, appeals from the Hardeman County Circuit Court’s dismissal of his post-conviction petition. He claims that the trial court erred in dismissing his petition for failure to state a colorable claim and seeks appointment of counsel and an evidentiary hearing. The state agrees that the trial court should not have dismissed the petition. We agree and reverse the dismissal and remand the case for further proceedings.
State vs. Charles Greer - W2006-01666-CCA-R3-PC View
Madison County - The Appellant, Charles Edward Greer, appeals the Madison County Circuit Court’s denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. On appeal, Greer raises the single issue of whether he was denied the effective assistance of counsel because trial counsel should have “convinced” or “persuaded” him to testify in his own defense. After review of the record, we find no error and affirm the denial of the petition.
State vs. Carlos Sommerville - W2006-01211-CCA-R3-PC View
Shelby County - The petitioner, Carlos Sommerville, was convicted of first degree felony murder, second degree murder, and attempted first degree murder. The murders were merged, and the petitioner is serving an effective life sentence. The petitioner appeals from the trial court’s summary dismissal of his post-conviction petition. He contends his petition contained an allegation of ineffective assistance of trial counsel, which should have protected the petition from summary dismissal. After review, we conclude the post-conviction court improperly summarily dismissed the petition because it did state a basis to support the petitioner’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.
Daniel Lynn Owens vs. State - E2006-00821-CCA-R3-PC View
Blount County - The petitioner, Daniel Lynn Owen, pled guilty to arson (Class A felony) and setting fire to personal property (Class E felony), agreeing to a concurrent sentence of ten years for arson and two years for setting fire to personal property, as a Range II, multiple offender. The original judgment incorrectly listed the conviction for arson as a Class B felony rather than a Class C felony, and the trial court later amended the judgment to correctly indicate the petitioner had been convicted of a Class C felony. The petitioner filed this appeal to contest the amended judgment. We conclude that correcting a clerical mistake does not trigger a Tennessee Rule of Appellate Procedure 3 appeal as of right. No error exists, and the appeal is dismissed.
State vs. Stephanie E. Baney - E2006-00867-CCA-R3-CD View
Bradley County - The defendant, Stephanie E. Baney, pled guilty to especially aggravated stalking, two counts of aggravated assault, reckless endangerment, and vandalism over $1,000, stemming from two separate indictments, and was sentenced to an effective eight-year term. On appeal, she argues that the trial court erred in imposing consecutive sentences. After our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the trial court’s sentencing decision.
Cases posted the week of 05/28/2007
State vs. Thomas Louis Moore - E2006-01260-CCA-R3-CD View
Bradley County - The appellant, Thomas Louis Moore, was convicted by a jury in the Bradley County Criminal Court on one count of arson and one count of criminal trespass. He received a total effective sentence of seven years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the appellant argues that the evidence was insufficient to establish that he committed arson because the State failed to prove that he acted knowingly. Upon our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.
State vs. Rowland Keith Hall - E2006-00111-CCA-R3-CD View
Morgan County- Following a two-day trial before a Morgan County jury, the defendant, Rowland Keith Hall, was convicted of manufacturing methamphetamine, see T.C.A. § 39-17-417 (2006), and possession of drug paraphernalia, see id. § 39-17-425. Prior to sentencing, the defendant filed a motion to substitute counsel, which the trial court granted. The trial court imposed a four-year sentence on the manufacturing conviction to be served in community corrections after service of 90-days’ incarceration. The court ordered a suspended sentence of 11 months and 29 days for the paraphernalia conviction to be served concurrently with the four-year manufacturing sentence. On appeal, the defendant complains that the trial court admitted hearsay testimony that violated his confrontation rights and that trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance of counsel. After careful review, we affirm the judgments of conviction.
State vs. Brian Edward Eggleston - M2006-00210-CCA-R3-CD View
Marshall County - A Marshall County Circuit Court jury convicted the appellant, Brian Edward Eggleston, of five counts of child rape and four counts of aggravated sexual battery. After a sentencing hearing, the appellant received an effective twenty-year sentence in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, he contends (1) that the child rape statute is unconstitutional because it is a strict liability crime and does not allow for a mistake of fact defense; (2) that the trial court erred by denying his motion to suppress his statement to police; (3) that the trial court erred by admitting into evidence an inflammatory comment made by the appellant; (4) that a State witness committed several instances of misconduct; (5) that the State improperly shifted the burden of proof to the defense several times; and (6) that the trial court erred by not granting the appellant’s request for a continuance when the State violated the discovery rule and withheld exculpatory evidence. Finding no reversible error, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.
State vs. William B. Boggs - M2006-00444-CCA-R3-CD View
Williamson County- Following a jury trial, Defendant, William B. Boggs, was convicted of three counts of assault, a Class A misdemeanor, one count of disorderly conduct, a Class C misdemeanor, and one count of resisting arrest, a Class B misdemeanor. Two of the assault convictions were merged. The trial court sentenced Defendant to concurrent sentences of eleven months, twenty-nine days for his assault convictions, six months for his resisting arrest conviction, and thirty days for his disorderly conduct conviction, for an effective sentence of eleven months, twenty-nine days. The trial court ordered Defendant to serve his sentences in split confinement, with probation after serving ninety days in confinement. On appeal, Defendant argues that (1) the trial court erred in failing to give a complete charge to the jury on the offense of resisting arrest; (2) the trial court erred in denying Defendant’s written request for a special self-defense jury instruction; (3) Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-16-602 is unconstitutional; and (4) the trial court erred in not granting Defendant full probation. Defendant does not challenge the sufficiency of the convicting evidence on appeal. After a thorough review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.
State vs. Daniel William Davenport - M2005-01157-CCA-R3-CD View
White County - The appellant, Daniel William Davenport, was convicted pursuant to a bench trial for a violation of the Sexual Offender Registration and Monitoring Act, and he received a sentence of eleven months and twenty-nine days. On appeal, the appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, the qualification of a records custodian, and the sentence he received. Upon our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Roger Todd - M2006-01940-CCA-R3-CD View
Cannon County - The Defendant, Roger Todd, appeals from a trial court order denying funding for his psychological expert. After a thorough review of the record and applicable law, we conclude that Tennessee Rule of Appellate Procedure 3(b) does not provide a proper mechanism by which this Court may address an appeal of an order denying expert funding. Accordingly, the Defendant’s appeal is dismissed.
Ronald Ian Quimby vs. State - M2006-00918-CCA-R3-PC View
Giles County - The petitioner, Ronald Ian Quimby, was found guilty of incest (Class C felony) by a Giles County jury on November 12, 2003. On November 12, 2004, he agreed to a five-year sentence in the Department of Correction as a Range I, standard offender. On that day, the petitioner also pled guilty to five additional charges of incest, each carrying a five-year sentence, to be served consecutively for a total effective sentence of thirty years. On appeal, the petitioner contends that trial counsel was ineffective and argues that: (1) he did not knowingly, voluntarily, or intelligently waive his right to appeal his conviction; (2) counsel was not adequately prepared for trial; and (3) counsel failed to advise him regarding sentencing. After careful review, we conclude that counsel rendered effective assistance, and we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.
Hubert Johnson vs. State - M2006-01639-CCA-R3-HC View
Hickman County - The petitioner, Hubert Johnson, appeals from the circuit court’s summary dismissal of his pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus. Following our review of the parties’ briefs and applicable law, we affirm the circuit court’s judgment.
State vs. Raymond Lee McKinnie - M2006-01237-CCA-R3-CD View
WIlson County- The defendant, Raymond Lee McKinnie, was convicted by jury of aggravated robbery and sentenced to fifteen years imprisonment. In this appeal, he argues that: (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction; (2) there was erroneous and perjured testimony presented at trial; (3) a witness’ reference to other pending cases and investigations was unduly prejudicial; and (4) the trial court erred in denying his motion for a new trial in light of newly discovered evidence. Following our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Marcus Lee - W2006-02031-CCA-R3-CO View
Shelby County- The Petitioner, Marcus Deangelo Lee aka Marcus Jones, appeals the trial court's denial of his petition for coram nobis relief. The State has filed a motion requesting that this Court affirm the trial court's denial of relief pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals. We conclude that the State’s motion is meritorious. Accordingly, we grant the State's motion and affirm the judgment of the lower court.
State vs. John Lynch - W2006-01869-CCA-R3-HC View
Lauderdale County - The Petitioner, John E. Lynch, appeals the lower court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief. The State has filed a motion requesting that this Court affirm the trial court pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals. The Petitioner has failed to assert a ground that would entitle him to habeas corpus relief. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's dismissal.
State vs. Roseanne and Jerry Ward - W2005-01802-CCA-R9-CD View
Benton County - This appeal arises from the Benton County Circuit Court’s continued denial of pretrial diversion notwithstanding approval by the District Attorney General and previous reversal by this Court. This is the second interlocutory appeal in this matter. Upon due consideration of the record and the parties’ briefs, we reverse the circuit court’s judgment and remand for entry of an order approving the pretrial diversion agreement between the prosecutor and the defendants.
State vs. Trisha Plemmons - E2006-01144-CCA-R3-CD View
Blount County- The Defendant, Trisha Plemmons, appeals the revocation of her community corrections sentence. Finding no error on the part of the trial court, we affirm.
State vs. Larry Frazier - E2006-00955-CCA-R3-CD View
Sullivan County - The Defendant, Larry Frazier, was charged by presentment from a Sullivan County grand jury with violating an habitual traffic offender order, driving under the influence (ninth offense), and reckless aggravated assault arising from an automobile collision. Following a jury trial, the Defendant was convicted of violating the habitual traffic offender order, driving under the influence (sixth offense), and reckless aggravated assault. The Defendant was sentenced as a Range II, multiple offender to serve consecutive sentences, with an effective sentence of sixteen years in the Department of Correction. The Defendant filed a timely motion for a new trial, which was denied. On appeal, the Defendant argues that (1) the identification evidence was insufficient to support his convictions beyond a reasonable doubt, (2) the trial court erred in ordering his sentences to be served consecutively, (3) the trial court erred in sentencing the Defendant to the maximum sentence for each of his three convictions, (4) the trial court erred in denying the Defendant’s motion to waive all or part of his fines, and (5) the trial court erred in denying the Defendant probation or other alternative sentencing. Finding no reversible error, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.
State vs. Marcus L. Branner - E2006-00939-CCA-R3-CD View
Knox County - The defendant, Marcus L. Branner, was convicted by a Knox County Criminal Court jury of second degree murder of Michael Gardner, a Class A felony, attempted second degree murder of Richard Cagle, a Class B felony, and attempted second degree murder of Charles McGinnis, a Class B felony. He was sentenced to twenty-four years as a violent offender for the murder and eleven years as a Range I offender for each of the two attempted murders, and the sentences were imposed concurrently. In this attempt at a delayed appeal, he argues that the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions. We do not reach the merits of the defendant’s appeal because we are without jurisdiction to do so. Thus, we dismiss the appeal.
State vs. Roy Ernest Russell - E2006-00410-CCA-R3-CD View
Sevier County - The defendant, Roy Ernest Russell, appeals pursuant to Rule 37 of the Tennessee Rules of Criminal Procedure. The certified question of law for review is whether the defendant’s stop was constitutionally permissible. We conclude, based on the staleness of the information, no reasonable suspicion, supported with specific and articulable facts, existed that permitted a constitutional stop of the defendant’s vehicle. We further conclude that all evidence gathered from this constitutionally impermissible stop must be suppressed, and the evidence is dispositive to the case at hand. We reverse the judgment from the trial court and dismiss this case.
Cases posted the week of 05/21/2007
State vs. Steven Anderson - W2006-00866-CCA-R3-HC View
Hardeman County - The petitioner, Steven L. Anderson, appeals from the summary dismissal of his pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus. On appeal, he contends: the trial court did not follow the proper procedures for processing his petition for writ of habeas corpus; the court improperly dismissed his petition; and his right against double jeopardy was violated. After careful review, we conclude that no error exists and affirm the dismissal of the petition.
State vs. Alton Tappan - W2006-00168-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - A Shelby County jury convicted the defendant, Alton Tappan, of aggravated burglary and theft of property valued at $1,000 or more but less than $10,000. The trial court imposed an effective incarcerative sentence of 14 years. On appeal, the defendant challenges the sufficiency of the convicting evidence and complains that his sentence is excessive because the State failed to prove an offender range above Range I. Our review assures us that the evidence is sufficient and that the defendant was properly sentenced. We therefore affirm the convictions and sentence.
State vs. Leah Ward - W2005-02802-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - The defendant, Leah Joy Ward, was found guilty by a jury of first degree premeditated murder. She was sentenced to life imprisonment. The only issue presented on appeal is whether the evidence supports the element of premeditation. After review, we conclude the evidence was sufficient and affirm the conviction.
Cases posted the week of 05/21/2007
State vs. Jimmie C. Scott - M2006-01698-CCA-R3-CD View
Dickson County - The defendant, Jimmie C. Scott, appeals, contending that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence. After review, we conclude the record on appeal is inadequate for proper appellate review because it fails to include the transcript of the suppression hearing which also includes the trial court’s reasoning for denial of the defendant’s motion to suppress. We affirm the judgment from the trial court.
State vs. Kim McGill - W2006-00499-CCA-R3-PC View
Shelby County - The Appellant, Kim McGill, appeals the Shelby County Criminal Court’s denial of her petition for post-conviction relief. McGill pled guilty to aggravated robbery and received a sentence of 7.2 years, as a mitigated offender, to be served in the Department of Correction. On appeal, she asserts that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to advise her of the right to request recusal of the trial judge based upon the judge’s comments to the Appellant following her request to obtain private counsel. Following review, we affirm the denial of the petition.
State vs. William Utley - W2006-01486-CCA-R3-CD View
Chester County - The Appellant, William T. Utley, was convicted by a Chester County jury of the Class D felonies of burglary and theft of property over $1000. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court imposed concurrent four-year sentences of incarceration for each conviction. On appeal, Utley has raised three issues for our review: (1) whether the evidence is sufficient to support the convictions; (2) whether the trial court erred by failing to instruct the jury on voluntary intoxication; and (3) whether the court erred in denying alternative sentencing. Following review of the record, we find no error and affirm the judgments of conviction and resulting sentences.
State vs. Savalas McNeal - W2005-01150-CCA-R3-CD View
Madison County - The defendant, Savalas O. McNeal, was convicted by a Madison County jury of possession of cocaine with the intent to sell and deliver and received a ten-year sentence to the Department of Correction as a Range II, multiple offender. On appeal, the defendant contends that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction. We conclude that the evidence was sufficient, and we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Thomas Powell - W2006-02139-CCA-R3-HC View
Hardeman County - The Petitioner, Thomas M. Powell, appeals the lower court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief. The State has filed a motion requesting that this Court affirm the trial court pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals. The Petitioner has failed to assert a ground that would entitle him to habeas corpus relief. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's dismissal.
State vs. Ulysses Richardson - W2006-01856-CCA-R3-PC View
Shelby County - The Petitioner, Ulysses Richardson , appeals the trial court's denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. The State has filed a motion requesting that this Court affirm the trial court's denial of relief pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals. The petition for post-conviction relief fails as it is a second such petition and as it is barred by the statute of limitations. The petition similarly fails if considered as a petition for habeas corpus relief, a motion to reopen a petition for post-conviction relief or a petition for writ of error coram nobis. Accordingly, we grant the State's motion and affirm the judgment of the lower court.
State vs. Terry D. Jones - E2006-00228-CCA-R3-CD View
Knox County - The defendant, Terry D. Jones, appeals a certified question of law regarding a police officer’s stopping the vehicle he was driving, resulting in his arrest and charges for possession with intent to sell more than 26 grams of cocaine (count one), see T.C.A. § 39-17-417 (2006), possession with intent to deliver more than 26 grams of cocaine (count two), see id., evading arrest (count three), see id. § 39-16-603, resisting arrest (count four), see id. § 39-16-602, and public intoxication (count five), see id. § 39-17-310. Considering our standard of review, we agree with the Knox County Criminal Court that reasonable suspicion supported by specific and articulable facts existed for the stop, and we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Thomas C. Russell - E2006-00827-CCA-R3-CD View
Anderson County - The defendant, Thomas C. Russell, appeals the Anderson County Criminal Court’s order of confinement for the defendant’s Range II, eight-year sentence for a conviction of aggravated assault. Because no reversible error occurred, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Billy Joe Carter - E2005-01282-CCA-R3-CD View
Cocke County - A Cocke County jury convicted the defendant, Billy Joe Carter, of first degree premeditated murder, see T.C.A. § 39-13-202(a)(1) (2006), first degree felony murder, see id. § 39-13-202(a)(2), and especially aggravated robbery, see id. § 39-13-403. The jury sentenced him to life in the Department of Correction without the possibility of parole for the two first degree murder convictions, and the trial court sentenced him to 40 years in the Department of Correction as a Range II, multiple offender for the especially aggravated robbery conviction. The defendant is to serve this sentence consecutively to his life sentence. Aggrieved of his convictions, the defendant appeals on three grounds: (1) that there was insufficient evidence to convict the defendant of any of the charges; (2) that the trial court erred in allowing Ricky Reed, the victim’s brother, to testify because Mr. Reed’s name was not included on the indictment; and (3) that the trial court erred in admitting autopsy photographs. After reviewing the record, we hold that the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendant on all charges. We also hold that the trial court neither abused its discretion in allowing Mr. Reed to testify nor in admitting the autopsy photographs. Thus, we affirm the judgment of conviction of especially aggravated robbery and the verdicts of guilty of first degree murder. We vacate the judgments of conviction of first degree murder and remand for entry of a judgment on the merger-surviving first degree murder conviction and a notation of the merger of the other first degree murder verdict.
State vs. Nicholas Kelly Webster - E2006-00863-CCA-R3-CD View
Hamilton County - The Defendant, Nicholas Kelly Webster, pled guilty to especially aggravated burglary and accessory after the fact. The trial court imposed an agreed eight-year sentence, but it denied the Defendant’s request for probation or an alternative sentence. The Defendant appeals, contending that the trial court erred when it denied him probation or an alternative sentence. Concluding there exists no error, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.
State vs. Bobby Dale Parris - E2006-00893-CCA-R3-CD View
Bradley County- The defendant, Bobby Dale Parris, pleaded guilty to the second degree murder of his wife, Sandy Parris. See T.C.A. § 39-13-210 (2006). After an evidentiary hearing, the trial court sentenced the defendant to serve 20 years in the Department of Correction at 100 percent after finding two enhancement factors and no mitigating factors. See T.C.A. §§ 40-35-113 & -114 (2006). On appeal, the defendant claims that the sentence is excessive. Without reaching this issue, we remand this case for sentencing under the 1989 Sentencing Act and for correction of a clerical error in the judgment.
Perry Ricky Ray vs. Ricky J. Bell, Warden - M2006-02389-CCA-R3-HC View
Davidson County - Petitioner, Perry Ricky Ray, appeals the trial court’s summary dismissal of his petition for habeas corpus relief from his conviction for first degree murder. Upon review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs Herbert Cope - M2006-01058-CCA-R3-CD View
Overton County - The defendant, Herbert Cope, was convicted by an Overton County Criminal Court jury of sale of a Schedule II controlled substance (morphine), a Class C felony, and was sentenced by the trial court as a Range II offender to nine years in the Department of Correction. On appeal, he argues that the trial court imposed an excessive sentence by failing to apply applicable mitigating factors and erroneously applying an inapplicable enhancement factor. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Warren Curnutt - M2006-00552-CCA-R3-CD View
Giles County - Appellant, Warren Curnutt, was indicted with two counts of rape of a child. After a jury trial, Appellant was convicted on both counts. As a result, Appellant was sentenced to fifteen years for each conviction, to be served consecutively, for a total effective sentence of thirty years. On appeal Appellant presents the following issues: (1) whether the trial court erred by failing to require the State to elect offenses; (2) whether the trial court improperly admitted Appellant’s statement into evidence; (3) whether the trial court erred by allowing the trial to continue after the jury pool was allegedly unfairly prejudiced; (4) whether the trial court improperly instructed the jury on lesser included offenses; and (5) whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain the convictions. Because we determine: (1) that the prosecutor effectively elected offenses during closing argument; (2) that Appellant waived any issue regarding his statement because he failed at trial to object to the introduction of the statement on the grounds it was involuntary; (3) that Appellant waived the issue regarding the jury prejudice for failure to request a curative instruction; (4) that Appellant waived the issue regarding lesser included offenses for failure to request instructions in writing; and (5) the evidence is sufficient to support the convictions, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Christopher F. Waddell vs. State - M2006-01505-CCA-R3-PC View
Sumner County - The petitioner pled guilty to two counts of aggravated assault, four counts of attempted aggravated robbery, and three counts of coercion of a witness, stemming from three separate indictments. As part of the plea agreement, the petitioner received a six-year sentence for each attempted aggravated robbery conviction to be served concurrently. The trial court determined the petitioner’s sentence with regard to the remaining convictions in a separate sentencing hearing. At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court sentenced the petitioner to an effective sentence of thirty years. The petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief. Following a hearing, the post-conviction court denied the petition. On appeal, the petitioner argues that his plea was not made knowingly and voluntarily due to ineffective assistance of counsel. We have reviewed the record and found that trial counsel’s performance was constitutionally adequate and that the petitioner’s guilty pleas were knowing and voluntary. Therefore, we affirm the decision of the post-conviction court.
State vs. Mark Perry - E2006-00966-CCA-R3-CD View
Sullivan County - The defendant, Mark Perry, pled guilty to selling less than 0.5 grams of cocaine, a Class C felony. Pursuant to the plea agreement, the defendant was sentenced as a Range I, standard offender to six years with the manner of service to be determined by the trial court. After a sentencing hearing, the trial court ordered the sentence be served in confinement, denying any form of alternative sentencing. The defendant now appeals. We conclude that the trial court followed the appropriate statutory procedure and imposed a lawful sentence in that the severity of the offense, the defendant’s prior criminal behavior, and his lack of candor removed any presumption of an alternative sentence. We affirm the judgment from the trial court.
State vs. Dickey Cotton - W2007-00435-CCA-RM-HC View
Lauderdale County - This case is before us after remand by the Tennessee Supreme Court for reconsideration in light of its holdings in Summers v. State, 212 S.W.3d 251 (Tenn. 2007); Smith v. Lewis, 202 S.W.3d 124 (Tenn. 2006); and Shaun Hoover v. State, 215 S.W.3rd 776 (Tenn. Jan. 23, 2007). The petitioner, Dickey L. Cotton, appeals the circuit court’s summary dismissal of his pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus. Upon reconsideration, we affirm the court’s dismissal of the habeas corpus petition.
State vs. Rick Braden - W2006-00377-CCA-R3-CD View
Separate Concurring Opinion - View
Shelby County - The defendant, Rick Braden, was convicted by a Shelby County jury of two counts of aggravated robbery, and he received concurrent nine-year sentences. On appeal, he argues that (1) the trial court erred in not allowing him to introduce the guilty pleas of two named co-defendants, (2) the evidence is insufficient to sustain his convictions, and (3) the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury on the lesser-included offense of facilitation. Following our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we conclude that the trial court erred in failing to charge the lesser-included offense of facilitation, and therefore, reverse the judgments of the trial court and remand for a new trial.
State vs. Delshaun Epps - W2005-02487-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - The appellant, Delshaun Epps, was indicted for especially aggravated robbery and felony murder. After a jury trial, the appellant was convicted of especially aggravated robbery and reckless homicide. The appellant was subsequently sentenced to twenty-four years for the robbery conviction and four years on the homicide conviction. The trial court ordered the appellant to serve the sentences consecutively, for a total effective sentence of twenty-eight years. After the denial of a motion for new trial, the appellant pursued this appeal. On appeal, the appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence and his sentence. For the following reasons, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Cases posted the week of 05/14/2007
State vs. Jacqueline P. Warlick - M2005-01477-CCA-R3-CD View
Macon County - Following a bench trial in the Macon County Criminal Court, the Appellant, Jacqueline P. Warlick, was convicted of driving under the influence and sentenced to eleven months and twenty-nine days in jail, with the sentence being suspended after the service of two days in confinement. On appeal, Warlick argues that her conviction was obtained in violation of her Sixth Amendment right of confrontation, as recognized by Crawford v. Washington, 541 U.S. 36, 124 S. Ct. 1354 (2004), and her right under article I, section 9 of the Tennessee Constitution to “meet the witnesses face to face,” as recognized by State v. Maclin, 183 S.W.3d 335, 343 (Tenn. 2006). Specifically, Warlick challenges the admission of the following evidence under Crawford and Maclin: (1) her son=s statement, which was admitted as an excited utterance, made at the accident scene to an ambulance attendant that he knew his mother was going to wreck because she had been drinking; and (2) medical records from Vanderbilt University Medical Center, admitted pursuant to the Medical Records as Evidence Act, which contained: (a) Warlick’s statement to medical personnel that she had consumed alcohol prior to the wreck; and (b) laboratory results from the hospital indicating a blood alcohol level of “183 mg/dL.” Warlick further argues that the trial court erred by allowing a state trooper to testify with regard to the analysis and conversion of the blood alcohol test results. After review, we conclude that the admission of the challenged evidence was not error, as the evidence was not “testimonial” within the meaning of Crawford, and was properly admitted under a “firmly rooted hearsay exception” and bore “particularized guarantees of trustworthiness.” See Ohio v. Roberts, 448 U.S. 56, 66, 100 S. Ct. 2531, 2539 (1980). Warlick’s issue regarding the testimony of a state trooper is without merit. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Barry F. Braden vs. State - M2006-01218-CCA-R3-PC View
Davidson County - Following a jury trial, the Petitioner, Barry F. Braden, was convicted of six counts of aggravated robbery, a Class B felony. The Petitioner received an effective sentence of fifty years in the Department of Correction. This Court affirmed the Petitioner’s convictions and sentence on direct appeal. The Petitioner filed a timely pro se petition for post-conviction relief. The petition was amended by counsel and contained thirteen allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel. The post-conviction court held an evidentiary hearing on the petition and subsequently entered an order denying post-conviction relief. The Petitioner appeals the post-conviction court’s denial of relief. Because the record on appeal does not include a transcript of the evidentiary hearing in the post-conviction court, we conclude that the Petitioner has waived the issues argued on appeal. Because we must presume that the trial court correctly denied post-conviction relief, the judgment of the post-conviction court is affirmed.
Ulysses M. Hampton vs. State - M2006-01818-CCA-R3-HC View
Davidson County - The Petitioner, Ulysses M. Hampton, appeals from the habeas corpus court’s summary dismissal of his petition seeking habeas corpus relief. The petition fails to raise a cognizable claim for habeas corpus relief and, insofar as the pleading may be considered a petition for post-conviction relief, the petition is time-barred. The judgment of the Davidson County Criminal Court summarily dismissing the petition is affirmed.
State vs. Mohamed Medhet Karim - M2006-00619-CCA-R3-CD View
Wayne County - In November 2004, the defendant, Mohamed Medhet Karim, was indicted by a Wayne County grand jury on one count of attempted first degree murder. On August 31, 2005, following a jury trial in Wayne County Circuit Court, the jury convicted the defendant of attempted second degree murder and imposed a fine of $10,000. Following a sentencing hearing on October 13, 2005, the trial court sentenced the defendant to twelve years of incarceration as a Range I, standard offender, the maximum sentence allowed under the statute. The defendant timely filed a motion for a new trial on November 1, 2005; this motion was denied on January 4, 2006. The defendant now appeals, claiming his sentence was excessive. In making his claim, the defendant argues that two of the enhancement factors provided in Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-35-114 were improperly applied to his sentence. Concluding that application of the two enhancement factors which the defendant does not challenge is sufficient to support the twelve-year sentence imposed by the trial court, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. James Michael Hanners - M2006-01077-CCA-R3-CD View
Rutherford County - A Rutherford County Jury convicted Appellant, James Michael Hanners, of assault on September 19, 2002. The judgment form included the notation that “Assault-Bodily Injury” was the offense for which Appellant was convicted. On March 1, 2006, Appellant filed a Motion to Correct Judgment requesting that the notation be changed to read “Assault.” The trial court denied the motion stating in its order that the jury was instructed on assault based upon T.C.A. §39-13-101(a)(1), intentionally, knowingly or recklessly caus[ing] bodily injury to another . . . .” Appellant appeals from the trial court’s denial of the motion. We dismiss Appellant’s appeal because there is no appeal as of right for denial of a motion to correct judgment under Rule 3 of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure, and we decline to grant a writ of certiorari because the trial court has not acted without legal authority.
Robert K. Holloway vs. State - M2005-02273-CCA-R3-PC View
Dickson County - The petitioner, Robert K. Holloway, appeals the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. On appeal, the petitioner argues that his counsel rendered ineffective assistance because he: (1) failed to interview and call certain witnesses to testify; (2) failed to submit proof of the victim’s propensity for violence; (3) failed to impeach certain witnesses at trial; (4) failed to divulge a conflict of interest; (5) failed to introduce a letter written by the victim at trial; and (6) failed to challenge the petitioner’s sentence at the sentencing hearing and on appeal. The petitioner further argues that the cumulative effect of all of counsel’s errors requires reversal. After a thorough review of the record and the parties’ briefs, the judgment of the post-conviction court denying post-conviction relief is affirmed.
State vs. Jennifer Siliski - M2004-02303-CCA-R3-CD View
Williamson County - The defendant, Jennifer Siliski, was convicted by a Williamson County Circuit Court jury of eleven counts of animal cruelty. The trial court merged the convictions involving the same animals, resulting in nine convictions, and sentenced the defendant to concurrent terms of eleven months, twenty-nine days at 75% for each conviction, all suspended except for ten days, with the remainder of the time to be served on supervised probation, followed by eight years of unsupervised probation. The court additionally ordered that the defendant complete fifty hours of community service within the first year of supervised probation, that she be permanently prohibited from engaging in any commercial activity involving animals, and that she be subject to regular inspections of her home during her period of unsupervised probation to ensure her compliance with the terms of her sentence. On appeal, the defendant argues that counts 1 through 28 of the presentment were multiplicitious; the animal cruelty statute is unconstitutionally vague as applied in her case; the presentment failed to adequately state the facts constituting the offenses for which she was convicted; the trial court erred in denying her motion to suppress the results of the search warrant; the trial court erred in admitting a veterinarian’s report into evidence; she did not adequately waive her right to testify under Momon v. State, 18 S.W.3d 152 (Tenn. 1999); the trial court erred by ordering consecutive periods of probation; the trial court’s permanent prohibition against her commercial activity involving animals is too harsh; and the trial court lacked jurisdiction to modify her sentence after the original date of sentencing. Following our review, we affirm the defendant’s convictions but conclude that the trial court erred by ordering consecutive periods of probation in conjunction with concurrent sentences. Accordingly, we remand for resentencing.
Cases posted the week of 05/07/2007
State vs. Bruce Lee Woods - E2006-02367-CCA-R3-CD View
Hamilton County - The defendant, Bruce Lee Woods, pleaded guilty in Hamilton Coun