The following Opinions are available for download:
Cases posted the week of 09/24/2001
State sv. Robert L. Easterly -
E2000-02625-CCA-R9-CO View
In
this interlocutory appeal, Robert L. Easterly challenges the Knox
County Criminal Court's order denying his motion to dismiss a
presentment against him. Easterly claims that the state is barred from
prosecuting him for the offense charged in the presentment because (1) the case
was not joined with a prior prosecution of him in Sevier County, (2) the
criminal conduct charged in the presentment is the same offense for double
jeopardy purposes as the case in which he was convicted in Sevier County, and
(3) the delay in commencement of the Knox County prosecution violates his
speedy trial and due process rights. Because we agree with the defendant that
both the mandatory joinder rule and double jeopardy principles bar dual
prosecutions, we reverse the trial court's order and dismiss the presentment.
State vs. Jody Sweat -
E2000-02472-CCA-R3-CD View
Sevier County - The defendant, Jody Sweat, indicted for
attempted first degree murder and aggravated assault, was convicted of
attempted second degree murder and aggravated assault. The trial court imposed
concurrent sentences of 11 and four years, respectively. In this appeal of
right, the defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence for attempted
second degree murder; argues that the trial court improperly instructed the
jury on attempted second degree murder as a lesser included offense; contends
that the state was guilty of prosecutorial misconduct during closing argument;
and submits that the jury was allowed to consider exhibits never offered into
evidence. The judgments are affirmed.
State vs. Troy Davis - E2000-03050-CCA-R3-CD
View
Knox
County - The defendant, Troy Wayne Davis, was convicted of aggravated
assault. The trial court imposed a sentence of three years, to be served
consecutively to a robbery sentence for which the defendant was on probation at
the time of the aggravated assault. The single issue presented for review is
whether the evidence is sufficient. The judgment is affirmed.
State vs. Grady Paul Gatlin -
M2000-2356-CCA-R3-CD View
State vs. Grady Paul Gatlin -
M2000-2356-CCA-R3-CD ( Concur/Dissent) View
State vs. Grady Paul Gatlin - M2000-2356-CCA-R3-CD
( Dissent) View
Marshall County - The Defendant, Grady Paul Gatlin, was
convicted by a jury of possession with intent to sell a schedule IV controlled
substance, possession with intent to sell a schedule II controlled substance,
possession of drug paraphernalia, and conspiracy to possess with intent to sell
a schedule II controlled substance. In this appeal as of right, the Defendant
argues (1) that the evidence introduced at trial was insufficient to prove that
the Defendant intended to sell controlled substances and (2) that it was plain
error for the trial court to fail to instruct the jury on the lesser included
offense of casual exchange. We reverse the Defendant's convictions for
possession with intent to sell a controlled substance and also his conviction
for conspiracy to possess with intent to sell a controlled substance. The
Defendant's conviction for possession of drug paraphernalia remains unaffected.
State vs. Terry Rogier -
W2001-00551-CCA-R9-CD View
Madison County - The appellant, Terry A. Rogier, by means
of an interlocutory appeal seeks review of the trial court's decision affirming
the district attorney general's denial of pre-trial diversion. Rogier was
indicted by a Madison County Grand Jury for the offenses of reckless
endangerment, a class E felony, and reckless driving, a class B misdemeanor.
After review, we find that the prosecutor failed to consider all the relevant
factors in denying diversion. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court's finding
that the prosecutor did not abuse his discretion and remand to the trial court
for further proceedings.
State vs.
Kelvin Taylor - W2001-00166-CCA-R3-PC View
Weakley County
- The Appellant, Kelvin A. Taylor, appeals from the dismissal of his
petition for post-conviction relief by the Weakley County Circuit Court.
Pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, Taylor entered a "best interest" plea
to class D felony child abuse, and was sentenced to six years in the Department
of Correction as a range II offender. In this collateral attack of his
conviction, Taylor presents two issues for our review: (1) whether the general
sessions court's revocation of his bond without a hearing and the resulting
confinement prior to indictment violated double jeopardy and due process
rights; and (2) whether trial counsel was ineffective. After a review of the
record, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.
State vs. Thomas Jones - W2000-01028-CCA-R3-CD
View
Shelby County
- The appellant was convicted by a jury in the Shelby County Criminal
Court of second degree murder and was sentenced as a violent offender to
twenty-one years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On
appeal, the appellant raises the following issues for our review: (1) whether
the evidence was sufficient to convict the appellant of second degree murder;
and (2) whether the trial court erred by refusing to grant a mistrial because
of improper jury instructions characterizing the appellant's statement as a
confession. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the
judgment of the trial court.
State vs.
Kentrail Sterling - W1999-00608-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County
- The defendant was convicted of two counts of especially aggravated
kidnapping and two counts of aggravated robbery pursuant to Tennessee Code
Annotated §§ 39-13-305 and 402. In this appeal the defendant raises
the following issues: 1) whether the trial court had jurisdiction to try the
defendant; 2) whether the judgments of the trial court for especially
aggravated kidnapping are void because the defendant was not provided
sufficient notice of the charged offenses; 3) whether Tennessee Code Annotated
§§ 39-13-304(b)(2) and 305(a) are unconstitutionally vague and
ambiguous since both statutes contain only one aggravating element - the
employment of a deadly weapon; 4) whether trial counsel displayed impropriety
during closing arguments by erroneously stating that the defendant had
previously confessed to the crimes he was charged with; 5) whether counsel was
ineffective; 6) whether the jury charge was "unconstitutionally vague and
ambiguous for failure to charge as to any elements constituting especially
aggravated kidnapping," and 7) whether the defendant's consecutive and enhanced
sentences were proper. After examining each of these issues raised by the
defendant we modify the aggravated robbery sentences but otherwise affirm the
judgments of the trial court.
State vs.
Neil Friedman - E2000-02877-CCA-R3-CD View
Carter County
- The defendant, Neil Friedman, was convicted of driving under the
influence, third offense, and driving on a revoked license. The trial court
imposed a sentence of 11 months and 29 days, six months of which was to be
served in the county jail, for driving under the influence. A consecutive
sentence of six months, 30 days of which was to be served, was imposed for
driving on a revoked license. This court affirmed the judgment on direct
appeal. State v. Neil M. Friedman, No. 03C01-9704-CR-00140 (Tenn. Crim. App.,
at Knoxville, Apr. 14, 1998). The application for permission to appeal to the
supreme court was denied December 21, 1998. In a hearing conducted on the
following day, the trial court reduced the DUI sentence to 120 days, which the
defendant has since served, followed by seven months and 29 days of probation.
Over one year later, the trial court revoked the probation and ordered service
of the remainder of the sentence. In this appeal, the defendant contends that
the trial court no longer had authority to revoke the probation. Because the
sentence had been fully served and the probationary term had ended when the
probation revocation warrant was issued, the judgment must be reversed and the
cause dismissed.
State vs. Thomas Cowan
- E2000-02705-CCA-R3-CD View
Carter County
- The defendant, Thomas E. Cowan, Jr., was found guilty of contempt.
The trial court imposed a jail sentence of 10 days, six of which were
suspended. In this appeal of right, the defendant argues that the evidence was
insufficient; that the trial judge should not have acted as a witness; and that
the sentence was excessive. Because the evidence was insufficient, the judgment
is reversed and the cause dismissed.
Cases posted the week of
09/17/2001
State vs. Marvin W. Hill,
Jr. - E2000-02789-CCA-R3-CD View
Blount County - In July 1999, the Defendant pled guilty to
evading arrest and possession of marijuana, both Class A misdemeanors, and
received concurrent sentences of eleven months and twenty-nine days supervised
probation. In December 1999, the Defendant was indicted for assault and
aggravated criminal trespass, both of which are also Class A misdemeanors. In
January 2000, a violation of probation warrant was issued against the
Defendant, alleging that he had violated his probation in the first two cases.
In March 2000, the Defendant pled guilty to the assault and aggravated criminal
trespass charges, and a combined sentencing hearing and probation violation
hearing was held by the trial court. The trial court revoked the Defendant's
probation in the first two cases and imposed concurrent sentences of eleven
months and twenty-nine days incarceration. The court also imposed sentences of
eleven months and twenty-nine days incarceration in the second two cases, to
run concurrently with each other but consecutively to the sentences imposed in
the first two cases. On appeal, the Defendant argues that the trial court erred
in imposing sentences of incarceration in each case. Because our review of the
record reveals that the sentences were proper, we affirm the judgment of the
trial court.
Curtis L. Hutcherson vs.
State - E2001-00752-CCA-R3-CD View
Washington County
- The petitioner, Curtis L. Hutcherson, appeals from the summary
dismissal of his post-conviction claim for relief from a 1999 conviction for
selling heroin. The trial court concluded that the petition failed to state a
cause of action. Although we agree with the trial court's literal conclusion,
we believe that the circumstances in this case warrant allowing the petitioner
the opportunity to amend his petition pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. §
40-30-206(d). The judgment of the trial court is reversed and the case remanded
for further proceedings.
State vs.
Matthew Patrick Frontera - M2000-02747-CCA-R3-CD
View
Williamson
County - The Defendant, Matthew Patrick Frontera, pleaded guilty to
criminal impersonation, a Class B misdemeanor. Sentencing was left to the
discretion of the trial court. As part of his plea agreement, the Defendant
attempted to reserve the right to appeal a certified question of law relating
to the legality of his stop, detention and questioning by police officers. In
this appeal, the Defendant asserts that the trial court erred by refusing to
suppress the evidence obtained against him due to an unlawful stop and
detention. He also argues that the trial court erred by sentencing him to serve
six months in the county jail with release eligibility at seventy-five percent.
Because the Defendant failed to properly reserve his issue concerning his stop
and detention, we are unable to reach the merits of that issue. We affirm the
sentence imposed by the trial court.
King
David Johnson vs. State - M2000-02756-CCA-R3-PC
View
Maury
County - The petitioner, King David Johnson, appeals the trial court's
denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. The issue presented for
review is whether the petitioner was denied the effective assistance of counsel
at trial. The judgment is affirmed.
State vs.Steven L. Chrisman -
M2000-02812-CCA-R3-CD View
Montgomery County - The defendant, Steven L. Chrisman, was
convicted of three counts of aggravated burglary, Class C felonies. See Tenn.
Code Ann. § 39-14-403. The trial court imposed concurrent sentences of
eight years on each count; required jail confinement of 90 days; and ordered
placement in a Community Corrections program for the remainder of the sentence.
When the defendant failed to report to his Community Corrections officer,
failed to make restitution, and failed to pay costs, the trial court ordered
service of the remainder of the sentence in the Department of Correction. In
this appeal of right, the defendant contends that the trial court erred by the
revocation of his Community Corrections sentence. The judgment is affirmed.
State vs. David Harris -
M1999-02469-CCA-R3-CD View
Davidson County - The State appeals the judgment of the
Davidson County Criminal Court suspending the appellee's sentences for
aggravated robbery and granting the appellee probation for a term of
twenty-four years. Following a review of the record and the State's brief, we
reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand this case for proceedings
consistent with this opinion.
State vs.
Morris Pepper - M2000-00883-CCA-R3-CD View
Lincoln
County - The appellant, Morris Jason Pepper, was convicted by a jury
in the Lincoln County Circuit Court of one count of first degree premeditated
murder and was sentenced to life imprisonment. On appeal, the appellant raises
the following issues for our review: (1) whether the evidence is sufficient to
sustain his conviction; and (2) whether the trial court erred by failing to
grant the appellant's motion to suppress. Upon review of the record and the
parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Sandra Brown - M2000-00792-CCA-R3-CD
View
White County
- The defendant appeals the judgment of the trial court revoking her
probation. She raises two issues: (1) whether the evidence supported the trial
court's finding that she violated the terms of her probation by committing the
offense of accessory after the fact; and (2) whether the trial court had the
authority to order her to continue her supervised probation pending this
appeal. After a thorough review of the record, we find both issues have merit;
therefore, we reverse the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Scott Ray Anderson -
E2000-03040-CCA-R3-CD View
Blount County - The defendant appeals the judgment
entered by the Circuit Court of Blount County revoking his community
corrections sentence. The sole issue on appeal is whether the court abused its
discretion in ordering the defendant to serve the remainder of his sentence in
the penitentiary. After careful review, we affirm the trial court's
judgment.
State s. Janet Lawson -
E2000-02486-CCA-R3-CD View
Cumberland County - The defendant pled guilty to one
count of theft over $1,000.00 and the trial court sentenced her as a Range I
standard offender to three years probation. The defendant appeals from the
revocation of her probation, contending that the trial court abused its
discretion by ordering her to serve the remainder of her sentence in
confinement. Because we conclude that the record supports that trial court's
decision to revoke the defendant's probation, we affirm the judgment of the
trial court.
State vs. Charles
Francis - E2000-02599-CCA-R3-CD View
Morgan
County - In an indictment returned by the Morgan County Grand Jury,
defendant, Charles R. Francis, was charged with fourth offense DUI. Count 1 of
the indictment alleged that the triggering offense of DUI occurred on December
10, 1998. Count 2 of the indictment alleged that he had previously been
convicted of DUI on three separate occasions in Morgan County, Tennessee. The
defendant entered a "blind plea" to DUI, fourth offense, and sentencing was
submitted to the trial court for a later hearing. At the sentencing hearing,
the trial court ruled that defendant was convicted of the Class E felony of
DUI, fourth offense, ordered a sentence of two (2) years, with service by split
confinement of 150 days in the county jail, and the balance of the sentence to
be served in the Community Corrections program. Asserting that he should have
been sentenced for commission of a Class A misdemeanor DUI, fourth offense,
rather than a Class E felony, defendant has appealed. The original judgment
entered by the trial court reflected conviction of a Class A misdemeanor, but
the judgment was later amended to reflect conviction of a Class E felony, in
accord with the trial court's ruling at the conclusion of the sentencing
hearing. We affirm the amended judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Tracy Gober - E2001-00296-CCA-R9-CD
View
Bradley County
- The issue is how to compute the number of prior offenses available for
consideration in determining multiple offender status pursuant to Tennessee
Code Annotated section 55-10-403(a)(3). We conclude to compute the number of
prior convictions available for consideration, the court must first determine
whether the defendant has any prior convictions occurring within ten years of
the date of the instant conviction. If so, all prior convictions shall be
counted occurring within twenty years of the date of the instant conviction
provided no period greater than ten years has elapsed between any two preceding
prior convictions. An example is contained in the opinion. We reverse the trial
court's order amending the indictment to charge third offense and reinstate the
original indictment charging ninth offense driving under the influence.
State vs. Robert Morrow - E2001-02796-CCA-R3-CD
View
Cocke
County - The defendant entered a best-interest guilty plea in the
Cocke County Criminal Court to one count of especially aggravated kidnapping,
two counts of aggravated rape, and one count of criminal exposure to HIV. The
trial court sentenced the defendant as a Range I standard offender to six years
incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction for the criminal
exposure to HIV conviction, as a violent offender to 24 years incarceration for
the especially aggravated kidnapping conviction, as a violent offender to 24
years incarceration for one of the aggravated rape convictions, and as a
multiple rapist to 24 years incarceration for the other aggravated rape
conviction. The trial court ordered consecutive service of the sentences for an
effective sentence of 78 years incarceration. On appeal, the defendant takes
issue with the length of the sentences and the consecutive service imposed.
Based upon our review, we affirm the sentences imposed.
Roger Wayne Braden vs. State -
E2000-03072-CCA-R3-PC View
Hamilton County - On April 29, 1999, the petitioner's
status on community corrections was revoked and he was resentenced. On May 15,
2000, he filed a pro se post-conviction relief petition. The issue is whether
the petition is time-barred by the Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-30-202.
Because the revocation and resentencing became final thirty days after its
entry, which was May 29, 1999, as the State concedes, and we agree, the
petition was timely filed. We reverse the summary dismissal of the petition and
remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
State vs. Daniel Paul Batchelor -
E2000-02264-CCA-R3-CD View
Bradley County - Following a bench trial, the
defendant was convicted of hindering a secured creditor, a Class E felony. On
appeal, the defendant alleges that the evidence is insufficient to support the
conviction. After a careful review of the record, we conclude that the evidence
is sufficient and affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. William A. Tansil -
M2000-02940-CCA-R3-CD View
Williamson County - The defendant, William A. Tansil,
appeals from his conviction for driving under the influence of an intoxicant
(DUI), third offense, for which he received a sentence of eleven months,
twenty-nine days, with all but one hundred fifty days being suspended. He
contends that the trial court erred in finding him to be a third-time offender,
arguing that the judgment for one of his prior convictions is void on its face.
We affirm the trial court.
State vs. Robert G.
Bean - M2000-02797-CCA-R3-CD View
Williamson County - The appellant, Robert G. Bean,
challenges his conviction in the Williamson County Circuit Court of one count
of driving under the influence of an intoxicant (DUI), third offense. He
presents the following issues for our determination: (1) whether the trial
court erred in denying the appellant's challenge for cause of prospective juror
Thelma Woodard; (2) whether the trial court erred in denying the appellant's
motion to suppress the State's use at trial of the videotape of the traffic
stop of the appellant's vehicle; (3) whether the trial court erred in refusing
to instruct the jury on adult driving while impaired as a lesser-included
offense of driving under the influence; and (4) whether the trial court erred
in using the appellant's 1996 conviction of DUI to enhance the appellant's
sentence. Following a thorough review of the record and the parties' briefs, we
affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Doroteo Aparicio Lazaro -
M2000-01650-CCA-R3-CD View
Bedford County - Defendant was convicted by a Bedford
County jury of DUI, second offense, Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-10-401, and
driving while license revoked, second offense, Tenn. Code Ann. §
55-50-504, both Class A misdemeanors. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial
court ordered defendant to serve a sentence of 11 months, 29 days, with all but
90 days suspended, for the DUI conviction and a sentence of 11 months, 29 days,
with all but 60 days suspended, for his conviction of driving while license
revoked. The trial court further ordered that the sentences be served
consecutively, for an effective sentence of 150 days confinement, and that
defendant pay a total of $3600 in fines. On appeal, defendant raises the
following issues: (1) whether the trial court erred in allowing the arresting
officer to testify concerning the results of defendant's blood alcohol test
without first complying with the requirements set forth in State v. Sensing,
843 S.W.2d 412 (Tenn. 1992); (2) whether the trial court erred by considering
defendant's national origin prior to sentencing; and (3) whether the trial
court erred by ordering that defendant's sentences be served consecutively.
After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial
court.
State vs. Ronnie D. Denson -
M2000-02583-CCA-R3-CD View
Cheatham County - he defendant pled guilty to
aggravated assault with an agreed four-year sentence, and the manner of service
to be determined by the trial court. The trial court denied the defendant any
alternative sentence and ordered that the defendant serve his sentence in the
Department of Correction. The defendant appeals the trial court's judgment
denying him an alternative sentence. After review, we affirm the trial court's
judgment.
State vs. Quincy Bledsoe
- W2000-02701-CCA-R3-PC View
Fayette County - The appellant, Quincy Bledsoe,
appeals from the dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief by the
Fayette County Circuit Court. In 1997, Bledsoe pled guilty to aggravated
kidnapping and attempted felony escape and received an effective nine-year
Department of Correction sentence as a violent offender. On appeal, Bledsoe
seeks to set aside his convictions upon grounds that his pleas were "based upon
an uncounseled statement that was not knowingly and voluntarily given." Finding
this issue without merit, the judgment of the post-conviction court is
affirmed.
State vs. Paul Clever -
W2000-01810-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - The defendant pled guilty to driving
under the influence and was sentenced as a multiple offender. In this appeal as
of right, the defendant alleges that (1) the trial court erred in finding that
he was a third offender for purposes of sentencing, and (2) the DUI sentencing
statute is unconstitutional because it is vague and has an ex post facto
effect. After careful review, we affirm the defendant's conviction and
sentence.
State vs. Eric Glover -
W2000-01278-CCA-R3-CD View
Fayette County - In July of 1999, a Fayette County
Grand Jury indicted the appellant, Eric Terrell Glover, for the following
offenses: (1) first-degree premeditated murder; (2) first-degree felony murder;
(3) especially aggravated kidnapping; and (4) especially aggravated robbery.
Following a jury trial, Glover was convicted on all charges and, in accordance
with the jury's verdict, was sentenced to life imprisonment for first-degree
premeditated murder. For his convictions of especially aggravated kidnapping
and especially aggravated robbery, Glover was sentenced, as a violent offender,
to concurrent twenty year sentences on each charge, with these sentences
running concurrently to his life sentence. On appeal, Glover challenges the
sufficiency of the evidence supporting his convictions as a principal offender
under a theory of criminal responsibility for the conduct of another. He argues
that the proof, at best, supports only the subordinate criminal responsibility
of "facilitating." After review, we find no error and affirm the judgments of
the trial court.
State vs. Karl
Hamilton - W2000-02240-CCA-R3-PC View
Shelby
County - Petitioner appeals the order of the Shelby County Criminal
Court dismissing his petition for post-conviction relief. Following an
evidentiary hearing, the court held that the petition was time-barred by the
statute of limitations. After a thorough review of the record, we conclude that
the petition was filed timely, and reverse the decision of the post-conviction
court.
State vs. Doney Miles -
W2000-02587-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - The defendant appeals his conviction
for aggravated robbery and sentence of eight years and six months, arguing: (1)
there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction; (2) the trial court
erred in allowing hearsay into evidence under the excited utterance exception;
(3) the trial court erroneously failed to charge the jury on lesser-included
offenses; and (4) his sentence is excessive. After a thorough review of the
record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Marcus Turco - W2001-01085-CCA-R3-CD
View
State vs. Marcus Turco - W2001-01085-CCA-R3-CD
(Concur) View
Shelby County - This is an appeal by the State of
Tennessee from an order granting the defendant judicial diversion for the
offense of sexual battery. This order was the result of a Tenn. R. Crim. P. 35
motion to reduce a previously ordered sentence of one year in the county jail
with all time suspended and supervised probation for one year. Although the
Tenn. R. Crim. P. 35 motion was timely filed, the trial court did not act upon
the motion until after the original probated sentence had been fully served and
expired. Two issues of first impression are presented in this appeal. We
conclude that (1) judicial diversion is not a "sentence" and, therefore, may
not be granted as Rule 35 relief; and (2) a trial court may not modify a
sentence under Rule 35 after the sentence has been fully served and expired.
Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Jon Robert Goodale -
M2000-02140-CCA-R3-CD View
Davidson County - The defendant, Jon Goodale, was
convicted of first degree premeditated murder, felony murder, and especially
aggravated robbery in the Criminal Court of Davidson County. The first
conviction was merged into the felony murder conviction and the defendant was
sentenced to life. The trial court then conducted a sentencing hearing and
imposed a twenty-five year sentence for the especially aggravated robbery to be
served consecutive to the life sentence. In his appeal as of right pursuant to
Rule 3(b) of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure, the defendant argues
that (1) the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support his
convictions, (2) the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury
concerning accessory after the fact as a lesser-included offense to all
charges, and (3) the sentence imposed by the trial court is excessive. We
affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Adrian S. Lennox - M2000-02869-CCA-R3-CD
View
Davidson
County - The defendant, Adrian S. Lennox, was convicted by a jury of
aggravated burglary, vandalism, felony evading arrest and driving on a revoked
license. The defendant was then sentenced as a Range II offender to nine years
on the aggravated burglary conviction, three years on the vandalism conviction,
five years on the felony evading arrest conviction, and six months on the
conviction for driving on a revoked license. The trial court ordered that the
aggravated burglary and the felony evading sentences run consecutively. On
appeal, the defendant argues that (1) the evidence is insufficient to support
the defendant's convictions, (2) the trial court improperly denied the
defendant's motion for the preparation of trial transcripts prior to his motion
for new trial hearing, and (3) the trial court improperly sentenced the
defendant. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Cases posted the week of
09/10/2001
State vs. Kermit Penley,
Jama Penley and Angela Cunniff - E2001-01386-CCA-R10-CD
View
Greene County -
The State of Tennessee has applied to this court for permission to pursue an
interlocutory appeal pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Appellate Procedure 10. In
its application, the State complains that because the grand jury had yet to
take action to charge the respondents in connection with a homicide, the Greene
County Circuit Court was not empowered to conduct pretrial conferences, to
enter pretrial orders, to set a trial date, or to order the state to file its
notice of intent to seek the death penalty or life without possibility of
parole. We grant the Rule 10 appeal and generally vacate the lower court's
pretrial conference orders.
State vs. Charlie
Logan - M2001-00804-CCA-R3-CD View
Pickett County - The defendant was indicted on twelve
counts of aggravated rape and six counts of statutory rape. He pled guilty to
four counts of statutory rape, a Class E felony, with an agreed sentence of two
years on each count, to be suspended upon service of thirty days. The trial
court ordered the sentences to run consecutively, which ruling the defendant
now appeals. The defendant also appeals the court's denial of his application
for judicial diversion. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Frank Michael Vukelich -
M1999-00618-CCA-R3-CD View
Davidson County - On December 8 through December 17,
1998, Frank Vukelich, the defendant and appellant, was tried in the Davidson
County Criminal Court for one count of conspiracy to deliver 700 pounds or more
of marijuana, three counts of conspiracy to commit money laundering, and five
counts of money laundering. The jury found the defendant not guilty of one
count of conspiracy to commit money laundering, but guilty on all other counts.
Following a subsequent sentencing hearing, the court effectively sentenced the
defendant to thirty-four years of incarceration and ordered the defendant to
pay fines totaling $180,000. After a hearing regarding the defendant's motion
for new trial, however, the trial court dismissed four money laundering counts.
The defendant appeals here, arguing; (1) that the trial court erroneously
allowed the consolidation of indictments; (2) that although the trial court
correctly dismissed four money-laundering counts, the trial court erred by
refusing to dismiss the counts prior to trial, thus prejudicing the defendant;
(3) that the trial court erroneously denied the defendant's motion to suppress
the fruits of two search warrants executed at the defendant's home; (4) that
the defendant's confrontation rights were violated by the introduction of
hearsay at trial; (5) that the trial court erroneously refused to grant a
mistrial; (6) that the trial court erroneously allowed the introduction of
prior acts of the defendant at trial; and (7) that his sentence is excessive.
The State also appeals here, arguing that the trial court's dismissal of the
four money-laundering counts was erroneous. After a review of the record, we
hold that the trial court erroneously dismissed the four money laundering
counts, and those counts must be reinstated. As to the defendant's claims, we
find no merit. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed in part
and reversed in part.
State vs. Larry
Mitchell Watson - E2000-01923-CCA-R3-CD View
Madison County -
The defendant, Larry Mitchel Watson, appeals his conviction and sentence for
felony reckless endangerment in the Cumberland County Criminal Court. On
appeal, the defendant argues that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his
felony reckless endangerment conviction and that the trial court improperly
sentenced him. Because the jury was erroneously instructed on felony reckless
endangerment as a lesser-included offense of aggravated assault, we reverse his
conviction for that offense and remand the cause for a new trial in accordance
with this opinion.
State vs. Eddie
Pittman - W2000-01582-CCA-R3-CD View
Madison County
- The defendant appeals his convictions for attempted second degree murder and
felony possession of a weapon, arguing that he was denied his right to a
unanimous jury verdict by the trial court's failure to require the prosecution
to make an election of facts supporting the attempted murder. After a thorough
review of the record, we conclude that neither an election nor enhanced
unanimity instruction was required. Thus, we affirm the judgment of the trial
court.
State vs. Ronald Crafton -
W2001-00320-CCA-R3-CO View
Lauderdale County - The petitioner appeals the trial
court's dismissal of his petition for habeas corpus relief. The trial court
determined that the allegations contained in the petitioner's pro se petition
were not ones that would entitle him to habeas corpus relief, and therefore
dismissed his petition. After a careful review of the record, we affirm the
trial court's dismissal of the petition.
State vs. Elmer Fritts -
W2001-00833-CCA-R3-CD View
Lauderdale County - Petitioner appeals the summary
dismissal of his petition for habeas corpus relief which alleged that the
charges against him were untrue, that the statutes of limitations as to the
charges had expired before he was charged, and that his counsel was
ineffective. The post-conviction court determined that the allegations
contained in the petitioner's pro se petition did not entitle him to habeas
corpus relief. After careful review of the record, we affirm the dismissal of
the petition.
State vs. Tarran Kyles
- W2000-02152-CCA-R3-PC View
Madison County - The appellant, Tarran Kyles,
proceeding pro se, appeals from the order of the Madison County Circuit Court
denying his petition for post-conviction relief. The post-conviction court in a
"Preliminary Order"dismissed Kyles' petition, finding that the only issue
raised in the petition was previously determined on direct appeal. For the
reasons stated below, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court
dismissing the petition without an evidentiary hearing.
State vs. Jason & Debra Mobley -
W2000-01884-CCA-R3-CD View
Henry County - Following a police search of their
home pursuant to a warrant, the defendants, mother and son, were each indicted
on one count of possession of marijuana with the intent to manufacture, sell,
or deliver, a Class E felony, and one count of possession of drug
paraphernalia, a Class A misdemeanor. At the conclusion of their joint trial,
the son was found guilty of both counts as charged in the indictment. The jury
found the mother guilty of simple possession of marijuana, a Class A
misdemeanor, and possession of drug paraphernalia. The trial court denied their
motions for new trials, and the defendants filed timely appeals to this court.
On appeal, the defendants challenge the sufficiency of the evidence in support
of their respective convictions. The State raises the additional issue of
whether the defendants may properly be represented by the same appellate
counsel when the record is silent concerning whether the trial court addressed
the possible conflict created by the joint representation. After a careful
review of the record and an analysis of applicable law, we affirm the judgments
of the trial court.
State vs. Donald
Sikes - W2000-02960-CCA-R3-CD View
Madison
County - As the result of an altercation with the manager of a fast
food restaurant, the defendant was convicted by a jury of aggravated assault, a
Class C felony; assault, a Class A misdemeanor; unlawful possession of a
handgun while under the influence, a Class A misdemeanor; and the unlawful
possession of a weapon with the intent to go armed, as a Class C misdemeanor.
He was sentenced by the trial court to an effective sentence of four and
one-half years, with 150 days in confinement, and the remainder of his time on
intensive probation. Following the denial of his motion for a new trial, the
defendant filed a timely appeal to this court, raising the issues of whether
the evidence was sufficient to support his convictions of possession of a
weapon with the intent to go armed and possession of a handgun while under the
influence, and whether the trial court erred in enhancing his aggravated
assault sentence to four and one-half years and sentencing him to intensive
probation. Based on a careful review, we conclude that the evidence was
sufficient to support the defendant's convictions, and that the trial court did
not err in enhancing the defendant's sentence for aggravated assault.
Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Randall Smith -
W2000-02596-CCA-R3-CD View
Henry County - The appellant, Randall Keith Smith,
appeals from the denial of his motion to suppress evidence seized in his
residence during the execution of a search warrant. A written "motion to
suppress" was filed with the clerk on the day prior to Smith's scheduled trial
for drug charges. On the date of trial, following the close of all proof in the
case, Smith's trial counsel orally moved to suppress the evidence seized as a
result of the search, based upon the grounds recited in the written motion. The
trial court denied the motion, finding that (1) there was no factual basis to
support suppression; and (2) the motion was untimely. The jury found Smith
guilty of manufacturing methamphetamine, a Class C felony, and he received a
three-year community corrections sentence. After review, we find the
Appellant's suppression motion untimely. Accordingly, the judgment is
affirmed.
State vs. Gabriel Clark -
W2000-02595-CCA-R3-CD View
Madison County - The appellant, Gabriel Antonio
Clark, was convicted by a Madison County jury for one count of felony murder
and one count of aggravated robbery. Clark was sentenced to life imprisonment
for the murder conviction and, following a sentencing hearing, received a
twelve-year sentence for aggravated robbery. The sentences were ordered to be
served consecutively. On appeal, Clark raises the following issues for our
review: (1) Whether the evidence presented at trial is sufficient to support
his convictions; and (2) whether the trial court erred by failing to exclude or
redact a portion of Clark's statement to police which he contends was highly
prejudicial and in violation of Tenn. R. Evid. 403. After review, we find no
reversible error and affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Steven Whitehead -
W2000-01062-CCA-R3-CD View
Madison County - The appellant, Steven Lee Whitehead,
was convicted by a jury in the Madison County Circuit Court of three counts of
rape. Pursuant to the appellant's convictions, the trial court imposed
concurrent sentences of ten years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of
Correction. On appeal, the appellant presents the following issues for our
review: (1) whether the trial court erred in excluding at the appellant's trial
evidence of other sexual behavior by the victim; (2) whether the trial court
erred in excluding evidence of prior false testimony by the victim; (3) whether
the trial court erred in failing to either exclude DNA evidence or, in the
alternative, grant the appellant a continuance of the trial date; (4) whether
the trial court erred in excluding evidence concerning the appellant's
character; (5) whether the evidence adduced at trial is sufficient to support
the appellant's convictions of rape; and (6) whether the trial court erred in
failing to instruct the jury on sexual battery as a lesser-included offense of
each count of rape. Following a thorough review of the record and the parties'
briefs, we reverse the judgments of the trial court due to the court's failure
to instruct the jury on sexual battery, and we remand these cases for a new
trial.
State vs. Rickie Boyd -
W2000-01010-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - The defendant, Rickie Boyd, was
convicted by a Shelby County, Tennessee jury of the offense of aggravated
robbery. He was sentenced to 18 years incarceration as a Range II, multiple
offender. In this appeal he maintains the trial court erred in failing to
instruct the jury with respect to the lesser included offense of theft of
property. We conclude that is was error to fail to instruct the jury with
respect to theft of property. However, we also conclude that this error was
harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, and we therefore affirm the judgment of the
trial court.
State vs. George
Campbell - W2000-00703-CCA-R3-PC View
Shelby
County - The petitioner appeals the dismissal of his petition for
post-conviction relief, arguing that the post-conviction court erred in finding
that he had effective assistance of trial counsel. After a careful review of
the record, we conclude that the petitioner failed to meet his burden of
proving ineffective assistance of counsel. Accordingly, we affirm the
post-conviction court's dismissal of the petition for post-conviction
relief.
State vs. Larry Dickerson -
W2000-02201-CCA-R3-CD View
Crockett County - The defendant appeals his
premeditated first degree murder conviction for which he received a life
sentence, arguing: (1) the evidence was not sufficient to convict him of first
degree murder; (2) he should have been granted a mistrial due to the
prosecutor's improper statements during closing arguments; and (3) he was
entitled to a special jury instruction regarding diminished capacity. After
reviewing the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Charles Goode - W2000-02267-CCA-R3-CO
View
Shelby
County - Charles Goode was convicted by a jury of aggravated rape, and
was sentenced to twenty-five (25) years in the Department of Correction. He
challenges the sufficiency of the evidence and the actions of the judge in
sentencing him to serve the maximum sentence. We affirm the judgment of the
trial court.
State vs. Sharon Rhea -
E2000-02617-CCA-R3-CD View
Blount County - The defendant pled guilty to two
counts of introduction of drugs into a penal institution. Her plea agreement
required her to serve two concurrent six-year sentences for the offenses, but
left the manner of service to the discretion of the trial court. Following a
sentencing hearing, the trial court ordered the defendant to serve her
sentences in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The defendant appeals this
decision, arguing that the trial court erred by not ordering an alternative
sentence. Because we conclude that the record in this case supports the denial
of alternative sentencing, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. James David Alder -
M2000-01825-CCA-R3-CD View
Franklin County - The defendant, James David Alder,
was convicted of attempted second degree murder, aggravated assault and
reckless endangerment. He was sentenced as a Range III Persistent Offender to
twenty (20) years for the attempted second degree murder, eleven (11) months
and twenty-nine (29) days for assault, and three (3) years for reckless
endangerment. His sentences were ordered to run concurrently to each other, but
consecutively to the sentence ordered in a case for which the defendant was on
bail at the time he committed the present offenses. On appeal, he argues: (1)
the trial court erred in allowing the jury to hear expert testimony concerning
the extent of the victim's injuries, the length of her hospital stay and the
number of surgeries she had; (2) the evidence was insufficient to sustain a
conviction for reckless endangerment; and (3) the trial court failed to follow
the sentencing guidelines and improperly ordered consecutive sentencing. After
a review of the law and the briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial
court.
State vs. Felicia L. Britton -
M2001-00176-CCA-R3-CD View
Montgomery County - After pleading guilty to felony
theft of identity, a Class D felony, and to violating her probation, the trial
court ordered the defendant to serve one year confinement and one year
probation with rehabilitation as a result of violating her probation. In
addition, the trial court ordered her to serve an additional three years of
probation for the felony theft of identity conviction, to run consecutive to
the sentence resulting from the probation violation. The defendant appeals and
asserts that the trial court erred in sentencing her on the probation
violation, erred in sentencing her to three years of probation for the felony
theft of identity, and erred in ordering the two sentences to be served
consecutively. After review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. James Larry Cox -
M2000-02556-CCA-R3-CD View
Grundy County - A Grundy County jury convicted the
defendant, James Larry Cox, for the attempted second degree murder of Jimmy
Sweeton. Subsequently, the trial court sentenced the defendant as a Range I
offender to ten (10) years of incarceration. On appeal, the defendant questions
whether he was denied a fair trial due to the trial court's exclusion of
evidence relating to the victim's reputation for violence, and whether he was
improperly denied the right to question the victim about a prior conviction.
After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial
court.
State vs. Robert L. Drew -
M2000-01853-CCA-R3-CD View
Davidson County -The defendant appeals his conviction
of theft of property valued at $1,000 or more, but under $10,000. He contends
that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress a showup
identification of him at the crime scene. He further contends that the evidence
was insufficient to support his conviction and that the trial court erred by
instructing the jury on flight. After review, we affirm the judgment of the
trial court.
Joan Elizabeth Hall vs. State
- M2000-02707-CCA-R3-PC View
Lincoln County -The petitioner was originally
convicted by a Lincoln County jury of criminal responsibility for first degree
murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. The petitioner's conviction was
affirmed on direct appeal. The petitioner sought post-conviction relief, which
was denied by the post-conviction court. In this appeal, the petitioner
contends her trial counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel. After a
thorough review of the record, we conclude that the post-conviction court
correctly denied post-conviction relief.
Steve Edward Houston vs. State -
M2000-01087-CCA-R3-PC View
Giles County -The petitioner appeals the
post-conviction court's denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. He
claims that he received ineffective assistance of appellate counsel on direct
appeal. After review, we hold that appellate counsel's decision on direct
appeal not to raise potentially improper closing arguments at trial by the
prosecutor was neither deficient performance nor prejudicial to the petitioner.
We affirm the post-conviction court's denial of the petitioner's petition.
State vs. William Edwin Lambeth -
M2000-00882-CCA-R3-CD View
Dickson County -A Dickson County Grand Jury indicted
the defendant for rape, and the defendant was convicted of the lesser-included
offense of sexual battery. The defendant filed a timely motion for new trial,
which was subsequently withdrawn. Almost two months later, the defendant filed
a pro se motion alleging his motion for new trial was unilaterally and
improperly withdrawn by counsel. Eventually, the trial court held that it
lacked jurisdiction to hear the motion for new trial since the defendant's
original motion had been withdrawn, and no timely motion was pending. On
appeal, defendant contends the trial court's jury charge authorized the jury to
convict based on lack of consent, when "force or coercion" was alleged in the
indictment. We conclude the motion for new trial was not properly before the
trial court, thereby waiving this issue. Nevertheless, we have examined the
issue for plain error and conclude defendant's allegation of error is totally
without merit. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
State vs. Barry Marable - M1999-00576-CCA-R3-CD
View
Montgomery
County -The defendant, Barry Marable, appeals from his convictions for
aggravated burglary, felony reckless endangerment, felony evading arrest, and
misdemeanor theft, contesting the sufficiency of the evidence. We affirm the
judgments of conviction except for the one for the evading arrest. We modify
that conviction from a Class D felony to a Class E felony and remand the case
for sentencing.
State vs. Freddy Allen
Perry - M2000-00013-CCA-R3-CD View
Giles County -The appellant, Freddy Allen Perry, pled
guilty in the Giles County Circuit Court to four counts of aggravated assault
and was sentenced as a standard Range I offender to a total effective sentence
of ten years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On
appeal, the appellant challenges the trial court's denial of full probation and
judicial diversion. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we
conclude that the trial court erred in failing to state on the record its
reasons for denying full probation and judicial diversion; therefore, we
reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand for further
proceedings.
State vs. Donald Lee Reid -
M2000-02026-CCA-R3-CD View
Davidson County - A Davidson County jury found Donald
Lee Reid guilty of driving under the influence, first offense. The trial court
imposed a sentence of 11 months and 29 days, suspended after service of 15 days
confinement, and a fine of $500.00. Reid challenges his conviction, his
sentence, and his fine. He raises the following issues on appeal: (1) whether
the trial court erred in not conducting a jury-out hearing on the defendant's
motion in limine regarding the admissibility of the defendant's BAC test
results; (2) whether the trial court erred in allowing the results of the BAC
test into evidence; (3) whether the trial court erred in refusing to instruct
the jury on driving while impaired as a lesser-included offense of driving
under the influence; (4) whether the defendant's sentence is excessive; and (5)
whether the trial court unconstitutionally imposed a fine of $500.00 since the
defendant did not waive his right for the jury to assess the fine. After a
careful review of the record, we remand for a jury to assess the fine but
affirm in all other respects.
State
vs. Edeward A. Schlegel, III - M2000-02520-CCA-R3-CD
View
Sumner
County - The defendant, Edward A. Schlegel, III, pled guilty to two
counts of theft over $1,000.00, Class D felonies. See Tenn. Code Ann.
§§ 39-14-103, -105. The plea agreement provided for concurrent
four-year sentences on each count with 12 months to be served in the local jail
and the remainder in the Community Corrections program. As a condition of
Community Corrections, the defendant would also be jointly and severally liable
to the victim for $3,863.10 in restitution. At the sentencing hearing, the
trial court ordered the defendant to pay an additional $2,500.00 in "special
damages," half of the estimated cost to install a security fence at the
victim's business location. In this appeal of right, the defendant contends
that the trial court erred by ordering him to pay restitution in an amount
different from that stated in the plea agreement. The sentences for theft are
vacated and the cause is remanded.
State
vs. James Elbert Taylor, Jr. - M2000-01802-CCA-R3-CD
View
Sumner
County - The defendant, James Elbert Taylor, Jr., was convicted for
the aggravated burglary, aggravated kidnapping, and aggravated assault of his
estranged wife, Jennifer Albert. The trial court sentenced the defendant to
four years for the aggravated burglary, ten years for the aggravated
kidnapping, and three years for the aggravated assault. The court further
ordered that the sentences run consecutively to each other and to defendant's
previous conviction in Louisiana. The defendant raises these issues on appeal:
1) the trial court erred by allowing evidence of defendant's prior case in
Louisiana, which was not relevant under Rule 404; 2) the trial court erred by
ruling that the defendant could be impeached, under Rule 609, with proof of a
conviction for attempted manslaughter in Louisiana; and 3) the trial court
erred in ordering consecutive sentencing without making specific findings under
Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-115. After review, we affirm the judgment of the
trial court.
State vs. Richard L.
Thompson - M2000-01429-CCA-R3-CD View
Wilson County
- Defendant, Richard L. Thompson, was accused by the Wilson County grand jury
of incest of his stepdaughter, in three counts, all occurring between May and
August 1999. On January 13, 2000, defendant agreed to plead guilty to one count
of incest for a sentence of six (6) years in the Department of Correction. As
part of the plea agreement, defendant requested a sentencing hearing for the
trial court to consider an alternative sentence and probation. At the
conclusion of the sentencing hearing, the trial court denied defendant's
request for an alternative sentence and probation and confined Defendant in the
Department of Correction for six (6) years. On direct appeal, defendant raises
five (5) issues: (1) Whether the trial court improperly considered a 1989
Pennsylvania conviction for an undetermined offense in finding defendant was
not an appropriate candidate for full probation or split confinement; (2)
Whether the trial court erred by finding certain statutory enhancement factors
applicable to the determination of how the sentence should be served, where
length of sentence was determined in the guilty plea; (3) Whether the trial
court erred in finding that the sentence of confinement was necessary to avoid
depreciating the seriousness of the offense; (4) Whether the trial court erred
in failing to consider whether measures less restrictive than confinement had
been applied to this offender; and (5) Whether the trial court erred in failing
to consider defendant's special needs into consideration as a factor that made
alternative sentencing (community corrections) particularly appropriate in this
case. Upon a review of the record, legal arguments, the briefs of the parties,
and applicable law, we find no error. Thus, the judgment of the trial court is
affirmed.
Cases posted the week of
09/03/2001
State vs. Kenneth
Chambly - E2000-01719-CCA-R3-CD View
Hamilton County
- The defendant, Kenneth Chambly, appeals his convictions for three charges of
aggravated sexual battery for which he received an effective sentence of ten
years without parole. He raises various issues on appeal. We reverse the
convictions and remand the case for a new trial because of the failure of the
state to elect offenses and the failure of the trial court to instruct the jury
regarding the need for offense unanimity in the verdict. We also conclude that
the trial court imposed an improper sentence of ten years for one of the
convictions.
Lawrence Strickland vs.
State - E2000-01236-CCA-R3-CD View
Bledsoe
County - The petitioner, Lawrence A. Strickland, appeals the Bledsoe
County Circuit Court's dismissal of his petition for habeas corpus relief,
which challenged his 1997 guilty-plea-based, Roane County conviction of
aggravated sexual battery. Based upon our de novo review of matters of law, we
conclude that the sentence imposed by the conviction court was void, although
we reject the petitioner's claim that the indictment is invalid. We reverse the
judgment of the lower court and grant habeas corpus relief in the form of
declaring the petitioner's Roane County sentence void. Because the conviction
rests upon a guilty plea that, in turn, was premised upon the agreed sentence
being valid, we vacate the petitioner's conviction and sentence. The conviction
court shall afford the petitioner the opportunity to withdraw his guilty plea
pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(e)(4).
John Garrison vs. State -
E2000-00858-CCA-R3-PC View
Knox County - Petitioner, John Clark Garrison, filed a
petition for post-conviction relief attacking his two convictions for theft of
property over the value of $10,000.00 but less than $60,000.00. Petitioner was
represented by counsel who filed the petition for post-conviction relief on his
behalf. The State filed a response to the petition. The trial court dismissed
the petition without an evidentiary hearing, finding that all of the issues
were either previously determined, waived, insufficient to assert specific
allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel, or presented no question of
constitutional deprivation. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Charles Montague vs. State -
E2000-01330-CCA-R3-PC View
Washington County - The petitioner appeals from the
post-conviction court's summary dismissal of his post-conviction relief
petition for failing to be properly verified under oath. The issue is whether a
petition for post-conviction relief must be verified under oath and whether the
petitioner's "affidavit and sworn statement" was sufficient to satisfy that
requirement. We conclude that the post-conviction court was correct in
summarily dismissing the petition for failing to be properly verified under
oath.
George Fitzpatrick vs.
State - M2000-02566-CCA-R3-PC View
The
Davidson County Grand Jury indicted the Petitioner for one
count of rape and one count of assault. The Petitioner's first trial ended with
a hung jury. Following a second trial, the Petitioner was convicted of rape and
assault, and sentenced to an effective thirty years of incarceration. His
convictions and sentences were upheld on direct appeal. See State v. George D.
Fitzpatrick, No. 01C01-9709-CR-00398, 1998 WL 775665 at *1, Davidson County
(Tenn. Crim. App., Nashville, Nov. 4, 1998), perm. to appeal denied (Tenn.
1999). Subsequently, the Petitioner filed a timely petition for post-conviction
relief alleging ineffective assistance of counsel at his trial. After a hearing
the court below dismissed the petition, from which ruling the Petitioner now
appeals. Upon our review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the
post-conviction court.
Richard McKee vs.
State - M2000-2866-CCA-R3-PC View
Davidson
County - The Defendant was convicted by a jury of first degree
premeditated murder and sentenced to life imprisonment without parole. His
conviction and sentence were affirmed on direct appeal. See State v. Richard
Burt McKee, No. 01C01-9606-CC-00278, 1998 WL 155558, at *1 (Tenn. Crim. App.,
Nashville, Mar. 31, 1998). The Defendant filed for post-conviction relief in
December 1998 alleging that he received ineffective assistance of counsel at
trial and on appeal and that juror misconduct during deliberations entitles him
to a new trial. The post-conviction court denied relief after an evidentiary
hearing. The Defendant now appeals as of right. Finding no merit in the
Defendant's contentions, we affirm the post-conviction court's judgment.
State vs. Billy Biles -
M1998-00650-CCA-R3-CD View
Warren County - The Defendant, Billy E. Biles, entered a
guilty plea to one count of possession with intent to sell a schedule II
controlled substance (0.5 grams of cocaine) and one count of simple possession
of marijuana in the Circuit Court of Warren County in case #F-7245. The
Defendant received an effective sentence of eight (8) years, and that sentence
was ordered to run concurrently with Defendant's sentences in case #F-7289 and
#F-7317. The Department of Correction placed him in the boot camp program for
four months, and then, effective July 3, 1997, the Defendant was placed on
probation for a term of seven years and nineteen days. Pursuant to Tenn. Code
Ann. § 40-20-206, the Tennessee Department of Correction issued a
Certificate of Probation to the Defendant. On October 3, 1997, Defendant's
probation officer filed a petition to revoke Defendant's probation and to issue
a warrant for his arrest. Following a subsequent hearing, the trial court
revoked Defendant's probation, and Defendant challenges that revocation in this
appeal. After a review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial
court, revoking probation. However, we remand to the trial court to correct a
clerical error in the judgment of Defendant's conviction in Count I of Case
#F-7245.
Cases posted the week of
08/27/2001
Deborah Louise Reese vs.
State - M2000-02553-CCA-R3-PC View
Rutherford
County - The petitioner, Deborah Louise Reese, pled guilty in the
Rutherford County Circuit Court to one count of felony murder, one count of
especially aggravated robbery, and one count of conspiracy to commit especially
aggravated robbery. The trial court sentenced the petitioner to a total
effective sentence of life imprisonment. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a
petition for post-conviction relief alleging that she received ineffective
assistance of counsel and that her guilty pleas were neither voluntarily nor
knowingly made. Following an evidentiary hearing, the post-conviction court
dismissed the petition. The petitioner now appeals this ruling. Upon review of
the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the
post-conviction court.
Larry Wade v.
State - M2000-01260-CCA-R3-PC View
Davidson
County - The petitioner, Larry Wade, appeals the denial of his
petition for post-conviction relief by the Criminal Court for Davidson County.
He asserts that the ineffective assistance of counsel and the unknowing and
involuntary nature of his guilty pleas entitle him to relief from his
convictions of attempted second degree murder and possession of one-half gram
or more of cocaine with intent to sell. Following a review of the record and
the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.
State vs. Melvin E. Beard -
M2000-02394-CCA-R3-CD View
Williamson County - The appellant, Melvin E. Beard, was
convicted in the Williamson County Circuit Court of one count of the sale and
delivery of less than .5 grams of crack cocaine, a class C felony. The trial
court sentenced the appellant to ten years incarceration in the Tennessee
Department of Correction and imposed a fine of two thousand dollars ($2000). On
appeal, the appellant raises the following issues for our review: (1) whether
the evidence at trial was sufficient to sustain the appellant's conviction; (2)
whether the trial court erred in allowing the State to introduce the portion of
an audio tape recording of the drug transaction that occurred outside the
presence of the appellant; (3) whether the trial court erred in refusing to
grant the appellant's motion for mistrial; and (4) whether the trial court
erred in sentencing the appellant. Upon review of the record and the parties'
briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Lloyd Hill vs. State - M2000-01428-CCA-R3-PC
View
Putnam
County - On September 25, 1998, the petitioner entered best interest
pleas to four counts of child rape. For these offenses he received concurrent
sixteen year sentences. According to the announced plea the convictions arising
out of Pickett and Overton Counties were set to be served at thirty percent
while the Putnam County convictions were at one hundred percent with the
potential to be reduced to eighty-five percent. Within the statute of
limitations the petitioner filed a post-conviction petition alleging that his
plea was not knowingly and voluntarily entered concerning the consequences
thereof. Subsequently, the trial court conducted a hearing and later denied the
relief sought in the petition. It is from that denial that the petitioner
brings the present appeal continuing to maintain that his plea was not
knowingly and voluntarily entered. After reviewing the record and applicable
caselaw, we find that the sentences imposed are illegal and, therefore, reverse
and remand the matter.
State vs. Darlene
Renee Blackhurst - E2000-01864-CCA-R3-CD View
Sullivan
County - The defendant, Darlene Renee Blackhurst, pled guilty to
second offense driving under the influence of an intoxicant ("DUI"), leaving
the scene of an accident involving injury, and three counts of reckless
aggravated assault. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court imposed an
effective sentence of three years, eleven months, and twenty-nine days, to be
served on intensive probation following a mandatory period of 45 days in
confinement for the DUI second offense. In this appeal, the State contends that
the trial court erred when it placed Defendant on full probation because the
trial court failed to properly consider the victim's testimony during the
sentencing hearing. Our de novo review reveals that the trial court did err in
its application of the law concerning victims' statements and in granting
probation for the full time remaining in Defendant's sentence following
confinement. However, our conclusion regarding the impropriety of probation is
based on sentencing considerations other than the testimony of the victim.
Accordingly, we reverse the trial court's judgment regarding the manner of
service of Defendant's sentence and remand this matter to the trial court to
determine whether Defendant should be incarcerated for the full term of her
sentence or, in the alternative, serve the balance of her sentence in split
confinement.
State vs. Roscoe Fields -
E2000-02495-CCA-R3-CD View
Anderson County - The Defendant, Roscoe W. Fields, was
convicted of driving a motor vehicle while his Tennessee driving privileges
were suspended (Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-50-504) and violation of the motor
vehicle registration laws (Tenn. Code Ann. § 55-50-504). The trial court
sentenced the Defendant to an effective sentence of six (6) months probation.
On appeal, he argues that: (1) the evidence was insufficient to convict him of
driving a motor vehicle while his Tennessee driving privileges were suspended;
and (2) he was denied his due process right to a fair trial. After a review of
the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Allen Bowers, Jr. -
E1999-00882-CCA-R3-CD View
Bledsoe County - A Bledsoe County jury convicted the
Defendant of rape of a child, and the trial court sentenced the Defendant to
eighteen years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The Defendant now
appeals, arguing (1) that his conviction should be reversed because a
prospective juror for this case stated in the presence of other prospective
jurors that he had been a prospective juror in a previous criminal case in
which the Defendant was on trial; (2) that the trial court erred by not
ordering a new trial for the Defendant based on a letter that the Defendant's
mother received from the victim subsequent to the Defendant's trial in which
the victim stated that "nothing happened" between the Defendant and the victim;
(3) that the trial court erred by not granting the Defendant a new trial based
on evidence presented during the hearing on the Defendant's motion for new
trial that a document introduced into evidence at trial as a filed divorce
complaint had actually not been filed and contained prejudicial and improper
statements about the Defendant; (4) that the State, during its closing
argument, improperly mentioned facts not in the record; (5) that the trial
court erroneously instructed the jury concerning a "deadlock" in a supplemental
instruction; and (6) that the trial court erred by giving the jury the
dictionary definition of "captious" and by sending the definition in writing to
the jury room without reading it to the jury. After a thorough review of the
record, we find no reversible error and therefore affirm the judgment of the
trial court.
State vs. Marcia Williams
- M2000-02593-CCA-R3-CD View
Marshall County - The appellant, Marcia Lynn Williams,
entered a best interest guilty plea in the Circuit Court of Marshall County to
one count of obtaining drugs by false pretense, a class D felony. Following a
sentencing hearing, the trial court imposed a sentence of three years
incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the
appellant argues that the trial court erred by denying the appellant a sentence
in the community corrections program. After a review of the record and the
parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Eddie McNabb - M2000-01490-CCA-R3-CD
View
Marion
County - The defendant appeals from his maximum sentence of six (6)
years for voluntary manslaughter and the trial court's imposition of
consecutive sentences. After review, we hold that the trial court properly
sentenced the defendant to six (6) years for the voluntary manslaughter
conviction and correctly ordered the defendant's convictions for voluntary
manslaughter and aggravated assault be served consecutive to one another.
Therefore, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Robert Blanton, Jr. -
M2000-01899-CCA-R3-CD ( Order) View
Montgomery
County - The defendant, Robert Blanton, Jr., was indicted by the
Montgomery County Grand Jury on June 6, 1995, on one count of sale of marijuana
and one count of delivery of marijuana, both Class E felonies. The defendant
pled guilty to the indictment, and the trial court sentenced the defendant to
probation. An affidavit of violation of probation was filed on April 17, 1996,
and amended on September 6, 1996.
State vs.
Mark Doolen - M2000-01953-CCA-R3-CD View
Dickson County
- In this appeal, Mark A. Doolen, Jr. challenges the order of the Dickson
County Circuit Court requiring the appellant's payment of restitution in the
amount of $6,611.76 for his vandalism of two antique automobiles. Following a
review of the record and the parties' briefs, we conclude that the appellant
should have filed his appeal with the Tennessee Court of Appeals.
State vs. Glenn Russell Parvin -
E2000-01756-CCA-R3-CD View
Sullivan County - The Sullivan County grand jury issued
presentments against the defendant on one count of operating a motor vehicle
without a face shield; two counts of speeding; three counts of driving under
the influence; three counts of driving on a revoked license; two counts of
driving on revoked license after second or subsequent conviction for driving
while intoxicated; one count of driving on revoked license after second or
subsequent conviction for driving under the influence; one count of driving
while intoxicated, fourth offense; and one count of driving under the
influence, fourth offense. The charges resulted from three separate cases. The
defendant pled to all of the crimes in two different plea hearings and the
defendant was sentenced as a career offender to a total of eighteen years, with
a minimum jail time of 585 days, and with his last six years to be served on
probation. The trial court sentenced the defendant as a career offender and did
not apprise the defendant of the possibility that he could be sentenced as a
persistent offender, as opposed to a career offender. He moved to withdraw his
guilty pleas on this ground. The trial court denied his motion, and he appeals
the denial. Furthermore, the defendant waived his right to request probation or
alternative sentencing in one case, and the state agreed to allow the defendant
to serve probation in one case. In the third case, the defendant requested
probation or alternative sentencing. The trial court denied his request, citing
his extensive criminal history in support of its denial. The defendant also
appeals this denial. After reviewing the record and applicable case law, we
find these issues to be without merit and therefore affirm the lower court's
denial of defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty pleas and its denial of
probation or alternative sentencing.
Jeffrey
Miller vs. State - E2000-01192-CCA-R3-CD View
Meigs County
- Jeffrey Miller appeals the Meigs County Criminal Court's dismissal of his
petitions for writ of error coram nobis and writ of habeas corpus. Both
petitions seek redress for Miller's grievance that he has been required to
serve felony sentences in the Department of Correction, although his plea
agreements designated the location of confinement to be the Meigs County Jail.
Because neither coram nobis nor habeas corpus relief is available to address a
concern of this nature and because the petitioner's claims are factually
unfounded, we affirm.
State vs. Alan
Adler - W2001-00178-CCA-R3-CD View
Fayette
County - The petitioner was indicted for aggravated child neglect of a
child under six years of age, a Class A felony. Following a trial, a Fayette
County jury convicted him of the lesser offense of reckless endangerment, a
Class A misdemeanor. The petitioner, pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. §
40-32-101, petitioned for the destruction of the public records concerning his
arrest and prosecution for the felony charge on which he was acquitted. The
trial court ordered that all records relating to the petitioner's arrest and
prosecution be expunged, except those records relating to reckless
endangerment. In this appeal, the state argues the petitioner was not entitled
to expungement since he was convicted of a lesser-included offense. The
petitioner argues this court is without jurisdiction to hear the state's appeal
as a matter of right; the trial court properly ordered expungement; and the
trial court erroneously charged reckless endangerment as a lesser-included
offense of aggravated child neglect. After a thorough review of the record, we
conclude (1) the state appeal as of right is properly before this court; (2)
records relating to the petitioner's arrest and prosecution are not subject to
expungement; and (3) petitioner may not collaterally attack his conviction on a
lesser offense in an expungement action. Accordingly, we reverse the trial
court's order of expungement.
State
vs. Robert Carpenter Jr. - W2000-02610-CCA-R3-CD
View
Fayette
County - The Appellant, Robert Lewis Carpenter, Jr., was indicted by a
Fayette County Grand Jury for one count of premeditated murder, one count of
felony murder, one count of especially aggravated kidnapping, and one count of
especially aggravated robbery. Carpenter waived both his right to a trial by
jury and his right to have a jury determine punishment. On June 15, 2000, a
bench trial was held and Carpenter was found guilty on all counts. Following
the sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced Carpenter to life without the
possibility of parole, based upon its finding of three aggravating
circumstances (Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-204(i)(5), (i)(6) and (i)(7)). On
appeal, Carpenter raises three issues for our review: (1) Whether the trial
court erred in its application of aggravating circumstance (i)(5), i.e., the
murder was especially heinous, atrocious or cruel; (2) whether the trial court
erred in failing to find specific mitigating circumstances; and (3) whether
Carpenter's convictions violate double jeopardy principles and the
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, based upon his prior
convictions for federal crimes arising from the same factual circumstances.
After review, we find no error and affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Wygenzo Coburn -
W2000-01550-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - The defendant was convicted of voluntary
manslaughter, a Class C felony, and sentenced as a Range I, standard offender
to four years, six months in the county workhouse. In this appeal as of right,
he raises the following issues: (1) whether the evidence was sufficient to
support his conviction; (2) whether the trial court erred in failing to include
"moral certainty" language in its reasonable doubt instruction to the jury; and
(3) whether the trial court erred in its application of enhancement factor
(10). Based upon a careful review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Ralph Cooper -
W2000-02612-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - This is an appeal from an order denying a
petition for reinstatement of a motor vehicle operator's license pursuant to
Tennessee Code Annotated Section 55-10-615(b). The court ruled that a
subsequent conviction for driving without a license precluded the court from
restoring the petitioner's driving privileges for a period of three years after
the new conviction. After a careful review, we hold that the court incorrectly
concluded it did not have discretion to grant driving privileges and remand to
the court for reconsideration of the petition.
State vs. Edward Drummer -
W2000-00414-CCA-R3-PC View
Shelby County - The Appellant, Edward Drummer, appeals
from the dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief by the Shelby
County Criminal Court. In September, 1997, Drummer pled guilty to one count of
aggravated rape and was sentenced to fifteen years confinement in the
Department of Correction. In 1998, Drummer filed a petition for post-conviction
relief challenging the validity of his guilty plea upon grounds of (1)
voluntariness and (2) ineffective assistance of counsel. The post-conviction
court, finding the claims unsupported, dismissed the petition. On appeal,
Drummer contends that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel. After
review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.
State vs. Michael Foster - W2000-01838-CCA-R3-CD
View
Shelby
County - The Appellant, Michael A. Foster, was indicted by a Shelby
County Grand Jury for possession of cocaine in excess of .5 gram, a class B
felony. Under the terms of a plea agreement, Foster pled guilty to criminal
attempt to possess cocaine less than .5 gram, a class D felony. The plea
agreement further provided that Foster would receive a sentence of two years
with the manner of service of the sentence to be determined by the trial court.
Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court ordered that Foster's two-year
sentence be served in confinement in the Shelby County Correction Center. On
appeal, Foster argues that the trial court erred in denying an alternative
sentence. Finding no error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Quentin Lewis -
W2000-01773-CCA-R3-PC View
Shelby County - The Appellant, Quentin Lewis, appeals from
the dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief following an
evidentiary hearing in the Shelby County Criminal Court. In his petition, Lewis
collaterally attacks his conviction for aggravated robbery upon grounds that
his trial counsel was ineffective. After review of this issue on appeal, the
judgment of the post-conviction court is affirmed.
State vs. Sheron Lampton - W2000-01583-CCA-R3-CD
View
Madison
County - The Defendant was convicted of second offense driving under
the influence and violation of the open container law. The trial court
sentenced her to eleven months, twenty-nine days incarceration for the DUI
conviction, suspended after service of ninety days, and to thirty days
incarceration, suspended, for violation of the open container law. In this
appeal as of right, the Defendant argues that the evidence presented at trial
was insufficient to support her convictions. Having reviewed the record, we
conclude that sufficient evidence was presented to support the jury's findings
of guilt and therefore affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Larico Ficklin -
W2000-01534-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - A Shelby County jury convicted the
defendant of second degree murder, and the trial court sentenced him to 25
years as a Violent Offender. In this appeal, the defendant alleges (1) the
evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction, and (2) the trial court
erroneously admitted the defendant's custodial confession. We conclude that the
defendant's initial arrest was without probable cause, and that the defendant's
confession was obtained approximately 53 hours from his arrest without a
judicial determination of probable cause. The defendant's confession was,
therefore, erroneously admitted, and the error was not harmless. We reverse the
defendant's conviction and remand for a new trial.
State vs. Andreia Jones - W2000-01536-CCA-R3-CD
View
Shelby
County - Defendant challenges the denial of pretrial diversion by the
District Attorney General and subsequent denial of relief by the trial court.
We conclude that the defendant failed to file a petition for writ of certiorari
and improperly sought to have the trial court consider matters not presented to
the District Attorney General; thus, defendant has failed to establish that the
District Attorney General abused his discretion in denying pretrial diversion.
We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Lavarne Madison -
W2000-01539-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - The defendant was charged in a two-count
indictment with one count of the unlawful possession of more than .5 grams of
cocaine with the intent to sell, and one count of the unlawful possession of
more than 26 grams of cocaine with the intent to deliver. A separate indictment
returned the same day charged one count of the unlawful possession of
marijuana. Pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, he subsequently pled guilty
to two misdemeanor drug possession offenses in connection with the charges, and
was sentenced to concurrent sentences of 11 months, 29 days. The trial court
refused his request for judicial diversion, but granted him probation, with the
condition that he spend 90 days in a halfway house. In a timely filed appeal to
this court, the defendant raises two issues: (1) whether the trial court erred
in denying his request for judicial diversion; and (2) whether the trial court
abused its discretion in sentencing him to three months in the halfway house as
a condition of probation. Based upon a careful review, we affirm the judgment
of the trial court. However, we remand to the trial court for entry of a
corrected judgment form to reflect the disposition of all charges against the
defendant.
State vs. LaQuenton Monger -
W2000-00489-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - The appellant, LaQuenton Monger, was
convicted by a jury in the Shelby County Criminal Court of one count of first
degree felony murder by aggravated child abuse and one count of aggravated
child abuse. The trial court imposed concurrent sentences of life imprisonment
in the Tennessee Department of Correction for the felony murder conviction and
twenty years imprisonment in the Department for the aggravated child abuse
conviction. On appeal, the appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence
underlying his conviction of felony murder and further challenges the trial
court's failure to instruct the jury on lesser-included offenses of felony
murder. Following a thorough review of the record and the parties' briefs, we
reverse the appellant's convictions of felony murder and aggravated child abuse
and remand the cases to the trial court for a new trial.
State vs. Reginald Webb - W2000-01895-CCA-R3-PC
View
Shelby
County - Petitioner appeals the denial of post-conviction relief by
the Shelby County Criminal Court. He contends he received ineffective
assistance of counsel at his jury trial where he was convicted of second degree
murder. We affirm.
State vs. Charles R.
Blackstock - E2000-01546-CCA-R3-CD View
Hamilton
County - The defendant, Charles R. Blackstock, pled guilty to
especially aggravated kidnapping and two counts of rape of a child. See Tenn.
Code Ann. §§ 39-13-305, 39-13-522. The trial court imposed 25-year
sentences on each offense. The sentences were ordered to be served
consecutively, for an effective sentence of 75 years. The sentence for
especially aggravated kidnapping and the consecutive sentencing order are
affirmed. Because the trial court erroneously applied certain enhancement
factors to each of the sentences for rape of a child, the terms are modified to
23 years.
State vs. George Ratliff
- E1999-01214-CCA-R3-CD View
Washington County - The defendant, George E. Ratliff, was
convicted by a jury of rape of a child. In this consolidated appeal, Defendant
alleges various errors by the trial court, challenges his sentence, and appeals
the dismissal of his petition for writ of error coram nobis on the ground of
untimely filing. After a review of the record and applicable law, we reverse
the trial court's summary dismissal of the petition for writ of error coram
nobis based on the recent decision of our supreme court in Workman v. State, 41
S.W.3d 100 (Tenn. 2001). We remand this matter to the trial court for a hearing
on the merits of the petition for writ of error coram nobis. Pursuant to State
v. Mixon, 983 S.W.2d 661 (Tenn. 1999), appellate proceedings on Defendant's
appeal as of right from his conviction are stayed, pending the trial court's
ruling on the error coram nobis petition.
Cases posted the week of
08/20/2001
Charles Shelton vs.
State - E2000-02805-CCA-R3-PC View
Johnson
County - The appellant, Charles Shelton, appeals the dismissal of his
habeas corpus petition by the Johnson County, Tennessee, Criminal Court.
Following a review of the petition and the record herein we find that the
judgment of the trial court should be AFFIRMED.
Charles Mitchell vs. State -
E2001-00373-CCA-R3-PC View
Knox County - The petitioner appeals the denial of
post-conviction relief on his second degree murder conviction, arguing that the
post-conviction court erred in finding that he had effective assistance of
trial counsel. Following his entry of a plea of guilty to second degree murder,
the petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief, alleging
ineffective assistance of counsel. Specifically, he alleged that trial counsel
was ineffective for failing to thoroughly investigate and prepare his case, and
that were it not for the deficiencies in counsel's representation, he would not
have entered his plea of guilty. At the conclusion of an evidentiary hearing,
the post-conviction court dismissed the petition, finding that the petitioner
had failed to offer any proof to support his allegations. After a careful
review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.
State vs. Bobby Tucker - E2001-00017-CCA-R3-CD
View
Cumberland
County - The defendant, Bobby Gene Tucker, appeals from the revocation
of his probation received for his conviction for driving under the influence of
an intoxicant (DUI) after having served fifteen days in confinement. He
contends (1) that the revocation warrant and affidavit are void, thereby
voiding his probation revocation and (2) that the trial court abused its
discretion in sentencing him to serve the maximum term of eleven months,
twenty-nine days with credit for time served. We affirm the trial
court.
State vs. Stella Rodifer -
E2001-00034-CCA-R3-CD View
Washington County - The defendant, Stella Rodifer, was
convicted of forgery, a felony; six counts of worthless checks under $500.00,
misdemeanors; and one count of worthless checks over $1,000.00, a felony. The
defendant was sentenced to consecutive terms of two and four years,
respectively, on each of the felonies. The trial court imposed concurrent
sentences of 11 months and 29 days on each misdemeanor, two of which were
ordered to be served consecutively for an effective sentence of seven years, 11
months, and 27 days. The trial court granted probation on the misdemeanors and
sentenced the defendant to a Community Corrections program on the felonies.
Four months later, the trial court revoked the alternative sentences and
ordered the defendant to serve four years for forgery; eight years for felony
worthless checks; and 11 months and 29 days (two consecutive) for each of the
six counts of worthless checks, for an effective sentence of 13 years, 11
months, and 27 days. In this appeal of right, the defendant argues that the
trial court erred by revoking her alternative sentences and by imposing
lengthier, consecutive sentences. The judgments are affirmed.
State vs. Daron Miller -
E2000-01867-CCA-R3-CD View
Bradley County - The defendant, Daron Miller, pled guilty
to three counts of sexual battery by an authority figure, a Class C felony. See
Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-527. The trial court imposed three concurrent
Range I sentences of three years. In this appeal of right, the defendant
contends that he was improperly denied probation. The judgments of the trial
court are affirmed.
State vs. Kelly
Hancock - M2000-02436-CCA-R3-CD View
Williamson
County - The appellant, Kelly A. Hancock appeals as a matter of right
from her conviction for driving under the influence. She contends the evidence
is insufficient to support the jury's verdict of guilt. After a review of the
evidence we affirm the conviction pursuant to Rule 20 of the Rules of the Court
of Criminal Appeals.
Charles Hayes v.
State - M2000-02360-CCA-R3-PC View
A Marshall
County grand jury indicted the petitioner on two counts of aggravated
burglary, two counts of theft, and one count of evading arrest. On October 29,
1997, the petitioner entered an open plea of guilt, reserving the determination
of the length and manner of sentencing for the trial court. Following a
sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced the petitioner to a total of
thirty-four years as a Range III persistent offender. In making its sentencing
determination, the trial court ran several of the offenses consecutively. On
direct appeal, the petitioner challenged his sentence as excessive. State v.
Hayes, No. 01C01-9804-CC-00176, 1999 WL 126650 at *1 (Tenn. Crim. App. at
Nashville, March 11, 1999). Finding that the record supported the trial court's
sentence determination, this Court affirmed the trial court's judgment. Id. at
*2. The petitioner then unsuccessfully applied for permission to appeal the
trial court's sentence determination to the Tennessee Supreme Court.
Thereafter, the petitioner filed a pro se petition for post-conviction relief,
alleging that he received ineffective assistance of counsel and that the trial
court judge who imposed his sentence should have recused himself due to his
personal knowledge of the facts of and victims in the case. The court appointed
counsel for the petitioner, and the petitioner's newly appointed counsel then
filed an amendment to the earlier petition, alleging ineffective assistance of
counsel by both trial and appellate counsel. The trial court conducted an
evidentiary hearing on the petition and dismissed the petition for
post-conviction relief. The petitioner now appeals the trial court's dismissal
of his petition, alleging that he received both ineffective assistance of trial
and appellate counsel and that the trial judge erred in denying his motion for
recusal. After the reviewing the record and applicable case law, we find these
issues to be without merit and therefore affirm the trial court's denial of the
petition for post-conviction relief.
State v.
Patrick Kossow - M2000-01871-CCA-R3-CD View
Warren County
- Defendant entered pleas of guilty to the rape of a child in Counts 1, 6, and
7 of the indictment and in Count 3, a plea of guilty to aggravated sexual
battery. At the conclusion of a sentencing hearing, the trial court imposed
sentences of 24 years for each count of rape of a child and 12 years for the
offense of aggravated sexual battery. The trial court ordered that the
sentences be served consecutively, resulting in a sentence of 84 years. On
direct appeal, Defendant asserts that the trial court erred in imposing an
inappropriate sentence on each count and erred in imposing consecutive
sentencing on all charges. After a review of the record, we affirm the trial
court's judgment.
State vs. Mark Shultz
- E2000-02013-CCA-R3-CD View
The state appeals the trial court's dismissal of its prosecution of the
defendant, Mark A. Shultz, for driving under the influence of an intoxicant
(DUI). It contends that the trial court's conclusion that the case had been
left unresolved too long could not lawfully justify dismissal. We reverse the
trial court and remand the case for further proceedings.
State vs. Darrell Presnell -
E2000-02544-CCA-R3-CD View
The
defendant, Darrell Presnell, who was indicted for especially aggravated
robbery, was convicted of the lesser included offense of aggravated robbery.
The trial court imposed a sentence of ten years. In this appeal of right, the
defendant contends that (1) there was a fatal variance between the presentment
and the proof at trial; (2) the trial court erred by instructing the jury on
aggravated robbery as a lesser included offense; and (3) the trial court erred
by not instructing the jury on the lesser included offense of robbery. Because
the trial court failed to instruct on the lesser offense of robbery, the
judgment must be reversed and the case must be remanded for a new trial.
Cases posted the week of
08/13/2001
State vs. James L.
Breeden - E2000-02794-CCA-R3-CD View
Blount County -
The defendant, James L. Breeden, appeals from the one-year sentence to
confinement imposed by the trial court for his driving a car in violation of an
order under the Habitual Motor Vehicle Offender (HMVO) Act that barred him from
driving. He contends that the trial court erred by not imposing a sentence of
split confinement with inpatient substance abuse evaluation and treatment. We
affirm the trial court.
State vs. Steve
Hilliard - E2000-02819-CCA-R9-CD View
Hamilton County
- The defendant was indicted for one count of extortion and one count of theft
of property over $1000, both Class D felonies. The defendant requested pretrial
diversion, which the prosecutor denied. The defendant then filed a writ of
certiorari to the trial court alleging an abuse of prosecutorial discretion.
The trial court affirmed the prosecutor's decision. The defendant now appeals,
arguing that the trial court erred in ruling that the prosecutor did not abuse
his discretion in denying pretrial diversion. Finding no error, we affirm the
judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Harold
Leonard White - E2000-01888-CCA-R3-CD View
Knox County - The
defendant, was arrested in September 1996 for aggravated assault, being a felon
in possession of a firearm, and fleeing. His case was not set for trial until
July 2000. The defendant moved for dismissal of the charges on the ground that
he had been denied his constitutional right to a speedy trial. The trial court
granted the defendant's motion, and the State now appeals as of right.
Concluding that the trial court incorrectly found that the defendant was
prejudiced by the delay, we reverse the trial court's ruling and remand this
matter for trial.
State vs. Mila Love -
W1999-01957-CCA-R3-CD View
Fayette County - The defendant appeals her
convictions for first degree felony murder and alleges four errors for our
review: (1) insufficient evidence; (2) failing to take judicial notice of the
definition of the word "gank;" (3) failing to determine the order of the
verdicts; and (4) failing to instruct on the lesser-included offenses of felony
murder. After review, we hold that sufficient evidence exists to support the
defendant's convictions for first degree felony murder and that the trial court
did not err in declining to take judicial notice of the definition of the word
"gank." We further hold that the trial court did not err in failing to
determine the order of the verdicts and there was no implied acquittal of the
felony murder convictions. Finally, we hold, pursuant to the recent Tennessee
Supreme Court opinion of State v. Ely, ___ S.W.3d ___ (Tenn. 2001), that the
offense of first degree felony murder does have lesser-included offenses of
second degree murder, reckless homicide, criminally negligent homicide, and
facilitation of felony murder. Therefore, because the trial court failed to
instruct on the lesser-included offense of facilitation of felony murder, we
reverse the defendant's convictions and remand for a new trial.
Kevin Taylor vs. State -
M2000-01414-CCA-R3-PC View
Davidson County - A jury found the petitioner guilty
of felony murder and attempted especially aggravated robbery. For these
offenses he received sentences of life and ten years respectively, which were
set to run concurrently. The petitioner unsuccessfully pursued a direct appeal.
See State v. Kevin Taylor, No. 01C01-9707-CR-00263, 1998 WL 849324 at *1 (Tenn.
Crim. App. at Nashville, Dec. 9, 1998). Following his unsuccessful direct
appeal, the petitioner then filed for post-conviction relief. He was
subsequently appointed counsel, and this attorney filed a "Supplemental
Petition for Post-Conviction Relief" alleging ineffective assistance of counsel
and the deprivation of the petitioner's right to due process. Following an
evidentiary hearing on these matters, the trial court found that the petition
did not merit relief. The petitioner now appeals this denial maintaining that
his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to subpoena and
introduce alleged telephone records; to interview and/or call certain potential
witnesses; and to properly investigate and cross-examine two State witnesses.
After reviewing the record and applicable case law, we find that these claims
lack merit and, therefore, affirm the trial court's judgment.
Michael Carlton Bailey vs. State -
M1999-01065-CCA-R3-PC View
Dickson County - The appellant, Michael Carlton
Bailey, appeals from the trial court's denial of his petition for
post-conviction relief. On appeal, the appellant challenges the trial court's
determination that (1) he received the effective assistance of counsel, and (2)
that he was not denied due process by the alleged violation of Tennessee Rule
of Evidence 615 by two State witnesses.
State vs. Anthony Carpenter -
W2000-01229-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - The defendant, Anthony Carpenter, was
convicted by a jury of second degree murder. In this appeal as of right, he
asserts that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction and that
the trial court erred by sentencing him to twenty-three years incarceration. We
find no error; thus, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Jacqueline Hurt - W2000-02193-CCA-R3-CD
View
Shelby
County - Pursuant to a plea agreement, the appellant, Jacqueline Hurt,
entered open guilty pleas to two counts of attempted first degree murder, one
count of especially aggravated robbery, and one count of especially aggravated
kidnaping, all Class A felonies. She received an effective sentence of
seventy-five years. The appellant contends that the trial court imposed an
excessive sentence because it erred in applying one enhancement factor and
because it imposed consecutive sentences. We affirm the judgment of the trial
court.
Michael Hyder vs. Allen Bargery -
W2000-01533-CCA-R3-CD View
Hardeman County - The state has appealed from the
judgment of the Circuit Court of Hardeman County granting the petitioner habeas
corpus relief and finding that his two consecutive three-year sentences had
expired. The state asserts that the sentences have not expired and that the
petitioner is not entitled to be released from prison. Because the state has
not filed an adequate record, we affirm the judgment of the trial
court.
State vs. Richard Wools -
W2000-01979-CCA-R3-CD View
Haywood County - Defendant appeals his conviction at
a bench trial for the offense of cruelty to animals. The trial court sentenced
him to eleven months and twenty-nine days with all but ten days suspended. He
raises the following issues for our review: (1) whether the evidence was
sufficient to support the conviction; (2) whether the trial court erroneously
admitted evidence outside the facts alleged in the charging instrument; (3)
whether the trial court erroneously allowed three witnesses to give opinion
testimony; and (4) whether the trial court erred in failing to suspend the
entire sentence. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. William Butler Bolling -
E2000-03166-CCA-R3-CD View
Sullivan County - William Butler Bolling appeals from
the Sullivan County Criminal Court's determination that he serve his plea
bargained, effective two-year sentence for gambling crimes in the Department of
Correction. He claims he should have received some form of alternative
sentencing, preferably probation, for his felony conviction. Because Bolling
has failed to demonstrate the error of the trial court's determination, we
affirm.
State vs. Timothy Tillery -
E2000-01996-CCA-R3-CD View
State vs. Timothy Tillery -
E2000-01996-CCA-R3-CD (Concur) View
Blount County
- The defendant, Timothy Tillery, appeals as of right from the revocation of
his probation. On appeal, he argues (1) that the trial court erred by refusing
to dismiss the probation revocation proceeding because his right to a speedy
trial was violated and (2) that the trial court erred by revoking his
probation. We find no error; thus, we affirm the judgment of the trial
court.
State vs. Edwin Milton Socall
- M1999-02727-CCA-R3-CD View
Montgomery County - The appellant, Edwin Milton
Socall, was indicted by a Montgomery County Grand Jury for driving under the
influence (DUI), reckless driving, violation of the implied consent law, and
driving on a revoked license (DORL). Following a bench trial, Socall was found
guilty of first offense DUI and second offense DORL. He was sentenced to eleven
months, twenty-nine days, with all but thirty days suspended, for DUI, and
eleven months, twenty-nine days, all suspended, for DORL, second offense. At
the bench trial, Socall was represented by retained counsel; however, no court
reporter was employed to transcribe the proceedings. Following his conviction,
Socall requested that he be found indigent for purposes of appeal and requested
appointed appellate counsel. The trial court granted his request and appointed
the public defender's office. Because the proceedings below were no