logo

Court of Criminal Appeals Opinions - 3 rd Quarter 2007

This Page Last Updated: November 08, 2007 at 10:52.49 hours

The following Opinions are available for download:


Cases posted the week of 09/24/2007
Leroine Martin vs. State - E2006-02280-CCA-R3-CD View
Knox County - The Petitioner, Leroine Martin, pled guilty to two counts of second degree murder and one count of aggravated robbery. He filed a petition for post-conviction relief alleging that he received the ineffective assistance of counsel prior to and during the guilty plea proceedings. The post-conviction court denied his petition. After a thorough review of the record and applicable law, we affirm the post-conviction court’s judgment.

State vs. Matthew Jordan Buentiempo - E2006-01791-CCA-R3-CD View
Blount County - The Appellant, Matthew Jordan Buentiempo, appeals the order of the Blount County Circuit Court revoking his probation and reinstating his original sentences of confinement. On appeal, Buentiempo alleges that the trial court erred in revoking his probation. After a review of the record, we affirm.

State vs. William Lee Collins - E2007-00531-CCA-R3-CD View
Bradley County - The Defendant, William Lee Collins, pled guilty to the following crimes: (1) possession of more than 0.5 grams of methamphetamine with intent to sell; (2) possession of a Schedule II drug with intent to sell; and (3) possession of marijuana. He was sentenced to an effective sentence of eight years on probation. In accordance with Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 37, the Defendant reserved as a certified question of law the issue of whether the search and seizure that led to his indictment and guilty plea were constitutional. We conclude that the search and seizure were constitutional, and, therefore, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Jermaine Hunter vs. Howard Carlton, Warden - E2007-00438-CCA-R3-HC View
Johnson County - The petitioner, Jermaine Hunter, appeals from the circuit court’s summary dismissal of his pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus. Following our review of the record and applicable law, we affirm the dismissal of the petition.

State vs. Kristi Dance Oakes - E2006-01795-CCA-R3-CD View
Sevier County - The Defendant, Kristi Dance Oakes, pled guilty to one count of statutory rape. The trial court denied her request for judicial diversion or full probation and sentenced her to eighteen months, of which six months is to be served in the county jail, followed by twelve months of supervised community probation. She appeals that decision. Upon review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court, after modifying the sentence. However, we remand for the correction of a clerical error in the judgment form.

State vs. Joseph Wayne Higgins - E2006-01552-CCA-R3-CD View
Knox County - The defendant, Joseph Wayne Higgins, was convicted by a Knox County jury of three counts of rape of a child, a Class A felony, and received an effective sentence of forty-five years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The defendant appeals his convictions, arguing that the trial court (1) committed plain error by improperly admitting testimony relating to acts committed by the defendant that were unrelated to the elected offenses, (2) committed plain error by improperly admitting testimony of three witnesses who bolstered the victim’s credibility after it had been impeached, (3) improperly instructed the jury as to “recklessness”, (4) improperly imposed an excessive sentence, and (5) improperly sentenced the defendant to consecutive terms. After reviewing the record, we conclude that the trial court improperly admitted testimony regarding specific acts of conduct by the defendant and failed to instruct the jury regarding prior consistent statements. However, because we conclude that these errors did not rise to the level of plain error, we deny the defendant relief on these issues. We also conclude that the trial court properly instructed the jury regarding recklessness and properly imposed consecutive sentences. However, we conclude that the trial court improperly applied sentence enhancement factors to one of the defendant’s convictions. Therefore, we affirm the judgments of the trial court but reduce the defendant’s total effective sentence from forty-five years to forty years.

State vs. Roger Melson - E2006-02483-CCA-R3-CD View
Blount County - The defendant, Roger Melson, pled guilty to aggravated assault, domestic assault, and aggravated burglary, and the trial court sentenced him to five years, with six months to be served in jail and the balance to be served on probation. Subsequently, the trial court issued a warrant alleging that the defendant violated his probation, and, after a hearing, it revoked the defendant’s probation. On appeal, the defendant claims the trial court abused its discretion by revoking his probation because the State failed to prove that he willfully violated his probation. Finding no error, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.

State vs. Marcus Dwayne Welcome - E2006-01839-CCA-R3-CD View
(Concur) - View
Knox County - The defendant, Marcus Dwayne Welcome, appeals as of right his Knox County Criminal Court jury conviction for criminal responsibility for aggravated robbery for which he received a sentence of twenty years as a Range II, multiple offender. On appeal, he contends that double jeopardy precludes his conviction, that the verdict form incorrectly and prejudicially characterized criminal responsibility as a lesser included offense of aggravated robbery, that the trial court should have granted a mistrial based upon the witness’s reference to the defendant’s previous incarceration, that the trial court erred in ruling a prior robbery admissible for impeachment purposes, and that the trial court committed errors related to sentencing. Following our review, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

State vs. Melvin Cofer - W2006-00631-CCA-R3-PC View
Hardeman County - The petitioner, Melvin Cofer, was convicted of aggravated vehicular homicide and vehicular assault. As a result, the petitioner received concurrent sentences of twenty-one years and three years. The petitioner’s convictions and sentences were affirmed on direct appeal. See State v. Melvin Cofer, No. W2002-01984-CCA-R3-CD, 2003 WL 21729450, at *1 (Tenn. Crim. App., at Jackson, Jul. 25, 2003), perm. app. denied, (Tenn. Nov. 24, 2003). Subsequently, the supreme court denied permission to appeal. The petitioner filed a pro se petition for post-conviction relief alleging, on numerous grounds, ineffective assistance of counsel. Counsel was appointed and several amended petitions were filed. The petition was denied by the post-conviction court after a hearing. This appeal followed. Because the post-conviction court properly denied the petition, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

State vs. Marlow Williams - W2005-02803-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - Appellant, Marlow Williams, was indicted in June of 2003 with six counts of aggravated robbery. In September of 2004, Appellant invoked the provisions of the Interstate Compact on Detainers to dispose of his charges in Tennessee. The Assistant Attorney General and Shelby County Criminal Court received the Request for Disposition of Indictment on October 4, 2004. Appellant was transported to Tennessee. A jury trial was held in September of 2005, where Appellant was found guilty of two counts of aggravated robbery. The trial court sentenced Appellant to concurrent ten-year sentences, but merged Count 2 for a single sentence under Count 1. On appeal, Appellant argues that: (1) the trial court improperly denied his motion to dismiss the indictment because his trial was held after the expiration of the 180 days provided for in the Interstate Compact on Detainers; (2) the trial court improperly admitted expert testimony on fingerprints; (3) the evidence was insufficient to support the convictions; and (4) the trial court improperly sentenced him. We determine that the trial was not held in violation of the Interstate Compact on Detainers and that the trial court properly admitted expert testimony on fingerprints. Furthermore, despite the improper application of enhancement factor (3), the offense involved more than one victim, we determine that the trial court properly sentenced Appellant. As a result, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Marcillo Anderson - W2006-02231-CCA-R3-PC View
Shelby County - The petitioner, Marcillo C. Anderson, appeals the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. He argues that counsel was ineffective due to his failure to: (1) adequately communicate with him concerning his case; (2) provide him with discovery materials regarding his case; (3) adequately investigate the case; and (4) adequately present proof that he was acting in self-defense. After review, we affirm the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief.

State vs. Marcario Chism - W2007-00592-CCA-R3-HC View
Lauderdale County - The petitioner, Macario Chism, appeals the Lauderdale County Circuit Court’s dismissal of his 2007 petition for a writ of habeas corpus. In the petition, the petitioner challenged the validity of his multiple 1993 Shelby County convictions, which were the results of guilty pleas and included convictions of aggravated burglary, aggravated robbery, and aggravated kidnapping. The petition alleged that the petitioner was free on bond on the charge of aggravated burglary when he was arrested for nine of the other offenses, and he claimed that the partial concurrent alignment of the resulting sentences rendered his judgments void. Because the petitioner failed to file a statutorily compliant petition, we affirm the circuit court’s dismissal of the petition.

State vs. Ronald Crafton - W2007-00346-CCA-R3-HC View
Lauderdale County - The petitioner, Ronald Dennis Crafton, appeals the summary dismissal of his petition for habeas corpus relief. He contends that his judgments for rape are void because the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions and because he was sentenced in absentia. Because the petitioner has failed to assert a cognizable claim for habeas corpus relief, the judgment of the habeas corpus court is affirmed.

State vs. David Milken - W2006-01850-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - The defendant, David Milken, was convicted of first degree felony murder and especially aggravated robbery, a Class A felony. He received concurrent sentences of life and twenty years. On appeal, he contends that the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions and that the trial court erred in admitting certain photographs into evidence. We conclude that no error exists, and we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

State vs. John Dupree - W2006-01645-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - The defendant, John Dupree, appeals the trial court’s judgment denying any form of alternative sentence. The defendant argues that the trial court erred in failing to allow him to call witnesses during the sentencing hearing and in denying an alternative sentence. After careful review, we conclude that no reversible error occurred during the sentencing hearing and that the denial of alternative sentencing was proper. We affirm the judgment from the trial court.

Gabriel Zaharia Kimball - E2006-01562-CCA-R3-PC View
Bradley County - Petitioner, Gabriel Zaharia Kimball, appeals the post-conviction court’s denial of his petition for post-conviction relief in which he alleged ineffective assistance of counsel in connection with his entry of a plea of guilty to the offense of rape of a child. Petitioner argues on appeal that his trial counsel was ineffective because he failed to (1) advise Petitioner of his right to appeal the juvenile court’s decision to transfer him to criminal court to be tried as an adult; (2) submit medical evidence at the transfer hearing; and (3) pursue an appeal of the juvenile court’s denial of his motion to dismiss. After a thorough review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

State vs. James Wesley Daniels - E2006-01119-CCA-R3-CD View
Cocke County - James Wesley Daniels, the defendant, appeals his convictions for premeditated first degree murder and attempted second degree murder. The defendant asserts as grounds for appeal that: the evidence was insufficient to support the convictions; the trial judge erred in refusing to recuse himself; and the trial court erred in failing to take remedial action after the defendant was observed in restraints by some jury members. We have concluded that no reversible error is present, and we affirm the convictions.

Cases posted the week of 09/17/2007
State of Tennessee v. Maria A. Dills - M2006-02161-CCA-R3-CD View
Dickson County - A Dickson County jury convicted the defendant of one count of driving under the influence (DUI), second offense, a Class A misdemeanor, one count of violating the implied consent law, a Class A misdemeanor, one count of driving on a revoked license, a Class B misdemeanor, and one count of leaving the scene of an accident, a Class C misdemeanor. On appeal, the defendant contends that the trial court erred in denying her pre-trial motion to suppress statements made to police inside her residence because the statements resulted from custodial interrogation and were given without proper Miranda warnings. The defendant also contends that the evidence produced at trial was insufficient to support her convictions. After reviewing the record, we conclude that the trial court properly denied the defendant’s motion to suppress her statements, and that the evidence produced at trial was sufficient to support the defendant’s convictions. Accordingly, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Kirby Abram Stephens - M2006-02521-CCA-R3-CD View
Fentress County - The Defendant, Kirby Stephens, was convicted by a Fentress County jury of first degree murder and received a sentence of life imprisonment. In this appeal as of right, the Defendant presents the following issues for our review: (1) whether statutory violations in the jury selection process resulted in prejudice to him; (2) whether the trial court erred in its method of polling the jury by a “show of hands”; (3) whether the trial court erred by not requiring the State’s designated representative, investigating officer Detective Gary Ledbetter, to testify first, violating the rule of sequestration; and (4) whether the evidence was sufficient to support his conviction. The State responds that, other than the Defendant’s challenge to the sufficiency of evidence, his issues are waived due to his failure to timely file a motion for new trial. After review, we conclude that the Defendant’s motion for new trial was timely filed and that there was no reversible error. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Terrance Carter v. State of Tennessee - M2006-01363-CCA-R3-HC View
Davidson County - The petitioner, Terrance N. Carter, pro se, filed a petition for habeas corpus relief in Davidson County which was summarily dismissed. He appealed pro se and was appointed counsel by this court. His pro se filing challenges whether the trial court erred in dismissing his petition without an evidentiary hearing. His appointed counsel requests that his habeas corpus petition be treated as one for post-conviction relief and that this court order the Davidson County Court to transfer the matter to the Maury County Criminal Court to proceed as if the petition was for post-conviction relief. We conclude that, without express authority, we should not order a transfer in this case, and the summary dismissal is affirmed.

State of Tennessee v. Antonio D. Waters - M2006-01468-CCA-R3-CD View
Sumner County - The defendant, after denial of his motion to suppress evidence, entered a plea of guilty to possession with intent to sell more than one-half gram of cocaine, a Class B felony. The negotiated sentence was eight years as a standard offender. The defendant appeals pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 37(b)(2)(I). After review, we conclude that denial of the motion to suppress was error. Accordingly, we reverse the conviction and dismiss the charges.

State of Tennessee v. Carol D. Pope - M2006-02749-CCA-R3-CD View
Davidson County - The defendant, Carol Denise Pope, appeals the Davidson County Criminal Court’s denial of alternative sentencing on her conviction of theft of property valued at more than $10,000 but less than $60,000, a Class C felony. See T.C.A. § 39-14-103 (2006) (proscribing theft); see also id. § 39-14-105(4) (grading theft by increments of dollar amounts of value). We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. David Nathaniel Cope - E2006-01005-CCA-R3-CD View
Washington County - The defendant, David Nathaniel Cope, appeals his conviction of Driving Under the Influence (DUI), a Class A misdemeanor, and resulting sentence of eleven months and twenty-nine days, with forty-six hours to be served in confinement. He argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to dismiss on the basis that the charging instrument was void. We affirm the defendant’s conviction. However, we discern an error in the judgment form, and we remand the case for a modified judgment to reflect that the defendant is to serve forty-eight hours in confinement.

State vs. Michael Lindsay - W2006-02518-CCA-R3-PC View
Shelby County - The petitioner, Michael Lindsey, appeals the denial of his petition for writ of error coram nobis and the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. Because the petitioner has failed to allege appropriate grounds for coram nobis relief and because his petition for post-conviction relief is procedurally barred, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

State vs. Lorenzo Woods - W2006-02493-CCA-R3-CD View
Madison County - The defendant, Lorenzo “Buster” Woods, pled guilty to one count of assault, a Class A misdemeanor, and received a sentence of eleven months and twenty-nine days suspended upon the service of six months in the local jail. On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred in denying him full probation. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court, but we remand the case for entry of a corrected judgment reflecting misdemeanor community corrections supervision for five months and twenty-nine days.

State of Tennessee v. Shari Brandenburg - M2007-00667-CCA-R3-CD View
Maury County - Following the stop of her vehicle, the defendant, Shari Brandenburg, was arrested for driving under the influence (DUI), a Class A misdemeanor. She pled guilty and was sentenced to eleven months and twenty-nine days, all suspended except for forty-eight hours, with the balance to be served on probation. As a condition of her guilty plea, she reserved a certified question of law: whether a private citizen may make an arrest for violation of Tennessee’s speeding statute. The State argues on appeal that the certified question is not dispositive of the case, and we agree. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.

State of Tennessee v. James David May - M2006-02143-CCA-R3-CD View
Bedford County - The defendant, James David May, pled guilty in the Bedford County Circuit Court to one count of jail escape, a Class E felony. He was sentenced as a Range II, multiple offender to three years and six months in the Department of Correction. On appeal, the defendant challenges the imposition of incarceration, arguing that it would be more appropriate to sentence the defendant to community corrections. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Charles Stan Martin - E2005-02155-CCA-R3-CD View
Sevier County - The defendant, Charles Stan Martin, was convicted by a Sevier County jury of one count of reckless homicide, a Class D felony, and received a four-year sentence to be served on probation. On appeal, the defendant contends that: (1) the evidence was not sufficient to support his conviction, (2) the reckless homicide statute is unconstitutional as applied to him, (3) the trial court erred in admitting evidence of a prior incident, (4) the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury on an alibi defense, and (5) the trial court abused its discretion in denying him judicial diversion. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Kevin D. Otey vs. Jim Worthington, Warden - E2006-02419-CCA-R3-HC View
Morgan County - The Petitioner, Kevin D. Otey, pled guilty in 1996 in Maury County to arson and was sentenced to four years confinement. In 1997, the Petitioner pled guilty to possession of cocaine for resale, felonious evading arrest, and reckless endangerment and received an effective sentence of six years. The Petitioner pled guilty in 1999 to another count of possession of cocaine with intent to sell and was sentenced to eleven years “concurrent with [his] prior sentence.” The Petitioner subsequently filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus and the Morgan County Court granted relief on the basis that the eleven-year sentence should be calculated as beginning at the imposition of his arson sentence, which had been imposed three years earlier. The State filed a timely notice of appeal and raised the following issues: (1) the habeas court erred by consulting the Tennessee Offender Management Information System report; (2) the habeas court erred by defining “concurrent” to award the Petitioner retroactive credit on his eleven-year sentence; and (3) the habeas court erred by granting relief in an unripe case. After a thorough review, we reverse the habeas court’s judgment and dismiss the Petitioner’s claim for habeas corpus relief.

Jeffery English v. State of Tennessee, Cherry Lindawood, Warden - M2007-00738-CCA-R3-HC View
Wayne County - The Petitioner, Jeffery English, appeals from the trial court’s dismissal of his petition seeking habeas corpus relief. The State has filed a motion requesting that this Court affirm the trial court’s dismissal of the petition pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals. The State’s motion is granted. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

James Earl Kenner v. Ricky J. Bell, Warden - M2005-00622-CCA-R3-HC View
Davidson County - Petitioner, James Earl Kenner, appealed to this Court from the trial court’s summary dismissal of his petition for habeas corpus relief. We affirmed the dismissal pursuant to Rule 20 of the Rules of the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals. James Earl Kenner v. Ricky J. Bell, Warden, No. M2005-00622-CCA-R3-HC, 2005 WL 2139402 (Tenn. Crim. App. at Nashville, Aug. 31, 2005), perm. to app. denied (Tenn., Dec. 27, 2005). On appeal by permission to the United States Supreme Court, the judgment of this Court was vacated and the case was remanded for further consideration in light of Cunningham v. California, 549 U.S. _____, 127 S. Ct. 856, 166 L. Ed. 2d 856 (2007). See James Earl Kenner v. Ricky J. Bell, Warden, 127 S. Ct. 1243 (Mem), 167 L. Ed. 2d 60 (2007). Subsequently counsel was appointed to represent Petitioner. After further briefing by the parties in light of the order of the United States Supreme Court, we have further considered the case and conclude that Petitioner’s sentences do not violate the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution. In actuality, the sentences imposed upon Petitioner, which he attacks in his habeas corpus petition, are based solely upon the verdict returned by the jury and Petitioner’s prior convictions. Accordingly, the sentences were imposed in compliance with the Sixth Amendment, as interpreted in Cunningham v. California, and the judgment of the trial court is therefore affirmed.

Dennis Joe Stobaugh v. State of Tennessee - M2006-01624-CCA-R3-HC View
Davidson County - The petitioner, Dennis Joe Stobaugh, pro se, appeals the dismissal of his petition for habeas corpus relief. The petitioner remained free on bond for more than seventeen years and now claims “credit for time at liberty.” After careful review, we conclude the petitioner is not entitled to relief and affirm the trial court’s dismissal of his petition for habeas corpus relief.

State of Tennessee v. Jerome Mayo - M2004-03061-CCA-R3-CD View
Montgomery County - This is an appeal as of right from a conviction on a jury verdict of aggravated robbery, and an appeal by the State from the sentencing decision. The Defendant originally received an enhanced sentence of eighteen years as a Range II, multiple offender, but his sentence was subsequently reduced to fifteen years by the trial court based upon Blakely v. Washington, 124 S.Ct. 2531 (2004). On appeal, the Defendant argues there is insufficient evidence to support his conviction for aggravated robbery. The State appeals the modified sentence, arguing the trial court erred in reducing the Defendant’s sentence. We affirm the judgment of the trial court as to the conviction, but remand for re-sentencing in accordance with this opinion.

Sidney Porterfield v. State of Tennessee, Ricky Bell, Warden - M2006-02082-CCA-R3-HC View
Davidson County - The petitioner, Sidney Porterfield, pro se, seeks habeas corpus relief from his 1986 Shelby County first degree murder conviction and death sentence, alleging his indictment was void because it was returned by a grand jury from which women had been systematically excluded as grand jury forepersons. He now appeals from the Davidson County dismissal of his petition. The State contends that this court is without jurisdiction to hear this appeal because the petitioner filed an untimely notice of appeal and offered no explanation and, further, that the petition does not meet all the criteria set forth in Tennessee Code Annotated section 29-21-107. Furthermore, the State contends that a void indictment does not deprive a trial court of jurisdiction, that the petitioner’s claim is not cognizable for habeas corpus relief because proof beyond the face of the judgment and record is required, and that our Supreme Court has rejected an identical claim regarding discrimination in the selection of a grand jury foreperson in State v. Bondurant, 4 S.W.3d 662 (Tenn. 1999). After careful review, we conclude that the notice of appeal is not jurisdictional and may be waived in the interest of justice. However, without explanation or request being filed, the interest of justice weighs against waiver; therefore, we dismiss this appeal.

State of Tennessee v. Timothy Orlando Hall - M2006-01269-CCA-R3-CD View
Sumner County - The defendant, Timothy Orlando Hall, pled guilty to aggravated assault, a Class C felony and domestic assault, a Class A misdemeanor. He received a total effective sentence of four years on probation. Thereafter, the trial court revoked the defendant’s probation on the basis that he had violated the terms and conditions of his probation. The defendant appeals the revocation of his probation, arguing that the trial court failed to exercise conscientious and intelligent judgment. Following our review of the record, the parties’ briefs and the applicable law, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. James Cook - M2006-01247-CCA-R3-HC View
Davidson County - The State appeals the trial court’s grant of Petitioner James N. Cook’s petition for writ of habeas corpus, arguing that Petitioner failed to comply with the mandatory procedural requirements for pursuing habeas corpus relief. Alternatively, the State contends that Petitioner is not entitled to habeas corpus relief because Petitioner’s judgment of conviction is not facially void. After a thorough review of the record, we conclude the judgment is not void, and reverse the trial court’s judgment granting Petitioner habeas corpus relief. The Petitioner’s conviction is reinstated.

State vs. Maurice Emery - W2006-02300-CCA-R3-CD View
Gibson County - The defendant, Maurice Emery, appeals from his Gibson County Circuit Court convictions of possession with intent to sell one-half gram or more of cocaine, a Class B felony, possession of marijuana, a Class A misdemeanor, and possession of drug paraphernalia, a Class A misdemeanor. See T.C.A. §§ 39-17-417, -418, -425. The defendant, a Range II multiple offender, is serving an effective twelve-year sentence in the Department of Correction for these convictions. He claims (1) that the trial court erred in denying his motion to sever his case from that of his co-defendant, (2) that his arrest was not supported by probable cause, and (3) that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel. We hold that the defendant is not entitled to relief and affirm.

State vs. Sandra Evans - W2006-00167-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - The defendant, Sandra Evans, was convicted of first degree felony murder in the perpetration of theft and voluntary manslaughter (a Class C felony). The conviction for voluntary manslaughter was merged with the felony murder conviction, and the defendant was sentenced to life imprisonment. On appeal, the defendant challenges the admissibility of hearsay testimony under the exceptions for excited utterances, and medical diagnosis and treatment. The defendant also contends that certain testimony violated her right to confrontation and that the evidence, as a whole, was insufficient to support the convictions. Upon review, we reverse the conviction and remand for a new trial.

State vs. William Murphy - W2006-02199-CCA-R3-CD View
McNairy County - The defendant, William Joe Murphy, was convicted by a McNairy County Jury of aggravated assault, a Class C felony. Subsequently, he was sentenced to five years in confinement as a Range I offender. On appeal, the defendant presents two issues for review: (1) whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain his conviction; and (2) whether the trial court improperly enhanced his sentence. Upon review of the full record and the applicable law, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Kevin Rudd - W2005-02814-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - The appellant, Kevin Rudd, was indicted for the first degree murder of his wife. After a jury trial, the appellant was found guilty of first degree murder and sentenced to life in prison. On appeal, the appellant argues: (1) the trial court improperly admitted propensity evidence in violation of Tennessee Rule of Evidence 404(b); (2) the trial court improperly denied a mistrial; and (3) the trial court improperly denied a motion in limine to exclude testimony that indicated the appellant engaged in shooting at other people. Because we determine that the trial court improperly admitted evidence in violation of Tennessee Rule of Evidence 404(b), we reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand for a new trial. The remaining issues are without merit.

State vs. Milica Wilson - W2006-00645-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - Appellant, Milica Wilson, was indicted for one count of attempted especially aggravated robbery. After a jury trial, Appellant was found guilty of facilitation of attempted especially aggravated robbery. He was found not guilty of felony murder and first degree murder. As a result, Appellant was sentenced on August 13, 2003, to serve eight years as a Range II, multiple offender in the Department of Correction. Appellant filed an untimely motion for new trial on September 25, 2003. Subsequently, Appellant filed two amended motions for new trial. The trial court conducted a hearing on the motions on February 27, 2006, at the conclusion of which the trial court denied the motion for new trial. Appellant filed an untimely notice of appeal. On appeal, Appellant contends: (1) the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction; (2) the trial court erred in admitting the testimony of co-defendant Frank Dowdy as there was no corroboration of the testimony; and (3) the trial court erred in giving a jury instruction on flight. Because Appellant filed an untimely motion for new trial, which resulted in the filing of an untimely notice of appeal, we must dismiss Appellant’s appeal.

State vs. Billy Kimmes - W2007-00022-CCA-R3-CD View
Madison County - The defendant was convicted by a Madison County jury of theft of property valued at $10,000 or more, a Class C felony, and sentenced to five years in prison as a Range I, standard offender. On appeal, the defendant contends that the evidence produced at trial was insufficient to support the jury’s guilty verdict, and he also contends that his sentence was excessive, both in the length of the sentence and the trial court’s failure to impose an alternative sentence. After reviewing the record, we conclude that the evidence produced at trial was sufficient to support the defendant’s conviction, and that the sentence imposed by the trial court was appropriate. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Derry Lovins - W2005-01446-CCA-R3-PC View
Dyer County - Following a jury trial, Petitioner was convicted of second degree murder and sentenced to twenty-three years in the Department of Correction. On direct appeal, this Court affirmed his conviction. State v. Derry Lavelle Lovins, No. W2003-00309-CCA-R3-CD, 2004 WL 224482, at *1 -7 (Tenn. Crim. App., at Jackson, Feb. 4, 2004), perm. app. denied (Tenn. Mar. 5, 2007). Petitioner then filed a pro se petition for post-conviction relief. Petitioner was appointed counsel and an evidentiary hearing was held. The trial court subsequently denied the petition and a timely notice of appeal was filed. After a review of the record, this Court determined that Petitioner was entitled to a delayed appeal to our supreme court pursuant to Rule 11 of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure. The remaining post-conviction proceedings were stayed pending the delayed appeal. On March 5, 2007, the supreme court denied Petitioner’s delayed appeal. We now address Petitioner’s remaining claims for post-conviction relief. Petitioner argues that he is entitled to post-conviction relief because (1) he received ineffective assistance of counsel, (2) his constitutional rights were violated by the State’s failure to disclose physical evidence during discovery, (3) he was prejudiced by the trial judge’s facial expressions, and (4) the jury reached a compromised verdict. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

State vs. Damario Tabb - W2005-02974-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - A Shelby County jury found the Appellant, Demario Tabb, guilty of the first degree felony murder of Floricelda Reynoso Ambrocio; the first degree felony murder of the unnamed, viable fetus of Floricelda Ambrocio; and the attempted aggravated robbery of Rodrigo Ramirez. At the penalty phase of the trial, the jury fixed Tabb’s punishment at life without the possibility of parole for each murder conviction. Following a separate sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced Tabb to five years imprisonment for his Class C felony conviction for attempted aggravated robbery and ordered that all sentences be served concurrently. On appeal, Tabb presents the following issues for our review: (1) whether his statement to police should have been suppressed because it was obtained in violation of his constitutional right to counsel; (2) whether the statement was properly admitted as rebuttal proof; and (3) “whether [the trial] court erred in its use of curative instructions to [the] jury.” Following review, we find no error and affirm the judgments of conviction.

State vs. Terrance Patterson - W2005-01638-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County- The Shelby County Grand Jury indicted Appellant for aggravated arson and vandalism over $10,000.00, but below $60,000.00. At the conclusion of a jury trial, Appellant was convicted as charged. The trial court sentenced Appellant to twenty-five years as a Range I Standard Offender for the aggravated arson conviction and eight years as a Range II Multiple Offender for the vandalism conviction. The trial court also ordered these sentences to be served consecutively. Appellant now appeals these judgments arguing that: (1) there was insufficient evidence to support his convictions; (2) evidence of impeachment by prior conviction was improperly admitted; (3) the trial court improperly allowed the amendment of the indictment; and that (4) the trial court erred in enhancing the sentence and in imposing consecutive sentences. We have thoroughly reviewed the record and affirm the judgments of the trial court.

State vs. Randall Carver - W2006-01010-CCA-R3-HC View
(Corrected Opinion)
Lake County - Petitioner, Randall Carver, filed a pro se petition for writ of error coram nobis and/or habeas corpus relief. The trial court treated the petition as one for post-conviction and summarily dismissed the petition. On appeal, this Court affirmed the post-conviction court’s dismissal of the petition. See Randall Carver v. State, No. M2002-02891-CCA-R3-CO, 2003 WL 21145572 (Tenn. Crim. App., at Nashville, May 16, 2003). Petitioner subsequently filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus, alleging numerous claims for relief. The trial court denied the petition without a hearing, determining that because Petitioner failed to produce material to the court for consideration and that because Petitioner was being held by the State of Kentucky on Kentucky charges all of Petitioner’s issues were moot. Petitioner appealed. On appeal, this Court, without reaching the merits of Petitioner’s argument, remanded the case for determination of “why the counsel who represented the petitioner in the lower court is not representing the petitioner on appeal.” See Randall Carver v. Tony Parker, Warden, No. W2005-00522-CCA-R3-HC, 2006 WL 140408, at *2 (Tenn. Crim. App., at Jackson, Jan. 18, 2006). On remand, the trial court learned that Petitioner had been granted parole on his underlying sentences in the State of Tennessee, waived extradition and was transferred to the custody of the State of Kentucky. Subsequently, the trial court entered an order denying the petition for writ of habeas corpus. Petitioner filed a timely notice of appeal. He argues that he is entitled to request habeas corpus relief while being incarcerated in Kentucky and that this Court should transfer the petition to the court in which he was originally convicted. Because an out-of-state resident may seek habeas corpus relief in Tennessee from a Tennessee conviction, see State v. Church, 987 S.W.2d 855, 857-58 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1998), and the supreme court recently determined in Joseph Faulkner a/k/a Jerry Faulkner v. State, ___ S.W.3d ___, 2007 WL 1226831, at *6 (Tenn. Apr. 27, 2007), that a “prisoner serving concurrent state and federal sentences in a federal correctional institution may challenge his state convictions through the use of the state writ of habeas corpus,” we determine that the trial court did not lose jurisdiction to make a determination on the merits of Petitioner’s claim by virtue of Petitioner’s parole from his Tennessee convictions and incarceration in Kentucky. Therefore, we reverse and remand the judgment of the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

State vs. Hector J. Jauregui - E2006-00868-CCA-R3-CD View
Bradley County - The defendant, Hector J. Jauregui, was convicted by a Bradley County jury of criminally negligent homicide, aggravated robbery and aggravated criminal trespass. The trial court sentenced the defendant as a Range I, standard offender to two years for the criminally negligent homicide conviction, ten years for the aggravated robbery conviction and eleven months, twenty-nine days for the aggravated criminal trespass conviction. The trial court further ordered the aggravated robbery conviction to be served consecutively to the remaining concurrent sentences, for a total effective sentence of twelve years. The defendant now challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his convictions for criminally negligent homicide and aggravated robbery. Additionally, he challenges the trial court’s denial of his motion to sever the offenses in this case. Following our review, we find no merit to the defendant’s challenges on appeal. However, we conclude that the judgments do not properly reflect the jury’s verdict and the trial court’s sentences. Therefore, we affirm the convictions and remand the case for correction of the judgments.

Cases posted the week of 09/10/2007
State vs. John Stephen Steele - E2006-00039-CCA-R3-CD View
Washington County - The appellant, John Stephen Steele, was found guilty by a jury in the Washington County Criminal Court of second degree murder, and the trial court sentenced him to twenty years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the appellant contends that the jury erred in rejecting his defense of insanity. Upon review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Cornell Poe - W2006-01202-CCA-R3-PC View
Madison County - The Petitioner, Cornell Poe, proceeding pro se, appeals the Madison County Circuit Court’s denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. In February 2006, the Petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief collaterally attacking his convictions for aggravated burglary and Class D felony theft. The post-conviction court appointed counsel, and counsel filed an amended petition. Following an evidentiary hearing, the post-conviction court denied relief. Because the record before this court fails to indicate that the Petitioner’s court-appointed counsel was allowed to withdraw or that the Petitioner has waived his right to counsel on appeal, the judgment of the post-conviction court is vacated, and this case is remanded to the post-conviction court for reinstatement of the order denying post-conviction relief. Appointed counsel shall continue in her representation of the Petitioner on appeal, and the case shall proceed in accordance with the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure.

State vs. Randall Carver - W2006-01010-CCA-R3-HC View
Lake County - Petitioner, Randall Carver, filed a pro se petition for writ of error coram nobis and/or habeas corpus relief. The trial court treated the petition as one for post-conviction and summarily dismissed the petition. On appeal, this Court affirmed the post-conviction court’s dismissal of the petition. See Randall Carver v. State, No. M2002-02891-CCA-R3-CO, 2003 WL 21145572 (Tenn. Crim. App., at Nashville, May 16, 2003). Petitioner subsequently filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus, alleging numerous claims for relief. The trial court denied the petition without a hearing, determining that because Petitioner failed to produce material to the court for consideration and that because Petitioner was being held by ths State of Kentucky on Kentucky charges all of Petitioner’s issues were moot. Petitioner appealed. On appeal, this Court, without reaching the merits of Petitioner’s argument, remanded the case for determination of “why the counsel who represented the petitioner in the lower court is not representing the petitioner on appeal.” See Randall Carver v. Tony Parker, Warden, No. W2005-00522-CCA-R3-HC, 2006 WL 140408, at *2 (Tenn. Crim. App., at Jackson, Jan. 18, 2006). On remand, the trial court learned that Petitioner had been granted parole on his underlying sentences in the State of Tennessee, waived extradition and was transferred to the custody of the State of Kentucky. Subsequently, the trial court entered an order denying the petition for writ of habeas corpus. Petitioner filed a timely notice of appeal. He argues that he is entitled to request habeas corpus relief while being incarcerated in Kentucky and that this Court should transfer the petition to the court in which he was originally convicted. Because an out-of-state resident may seek habeas corpus relief in Tennessee from a Tennessee conviction, see State v. Church, 987 S.W.2d 855, 857-58 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1998), and the supreme court recently determined in Joseph Faulkner a/k/a Jerry Faulkner v. State, ___ S.W.3d ___, 2007 WL 1226831, at *6 (Tenn. Apr. 27, 2007), that a “prisoner serving concurrent state and federal sentences in a federal correctional institution may challenge his state convictions through the use of the state writ of habeas corpus,” we determine that the trial court did not lose jurisdiction to make a determination on the merits of Petitioner’s claim by virtue of Petitioner’s parole from his Tennessee convictions and incarceration in Kentucky. Therefore, we reverse and remand the judgment of the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

State vs. Robert Austin - W2005-01963-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - A Shelby County jury found the Appellant, Robert Austin, guilty of two counts of first degree premeditated murder and one count of criminal attempt to commit first degree premeditated murder. Following the penalty phase of the trial, the jury sentenced Austin to two terms of life imprisonment without parole. At a subsequent sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced Austin to forty years, as a Range II offender, for the attempted first degree murder and ordered that all of his sentences run consecutively. On appeal, Austin presents the following issues: (1) whether the trial court erred in disallowing expert testimony regarding Austin’s capacity to form the requisite intent for intentional or knowing offenses; (2) whether the evidence is sufficient to support the convictions; and (3) whether the trial court erred in ordering consecutive sentencing. With regard to issue (1), we conclude that the trial court erred in excluding expert testimony; however, the error was harmless. The remaining issues are without merit. Accordingly, the judgments of conviction and the imposition of consecutive sentences are affirmed.

State vs. Jimmy Hoyle - W2007-00105-CCA-R3-PC View
Hardeman County - The Petitioner, Jimmie Lee Hoyle, appeals the summary dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief, arguing that it was error for the post-conviction court to deny relief without holding an evidentiary hearing, allowing him to amend his petition, or appointing counsel. Following our review, we conclude that the Petitioner stated a colorable claim in his petition. Accordingly, we reverse the post-conviction court’s order of dismissal and remand for further proceedings.

State of Tennessee v. John Jennings - M2006-02055-CCA-R3-CD View
Davidson County - The appellant, John Harvey Jennings, pled guilty in the Davidson County Criminal Court to two counts of rape, and he received a sentence of eight years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. Subsequently, he filed a motion for suspension of sentence, which motion was denied. On appeal, the appellant challenges the trial court’s denial of his motion for suspension of sentence. Upon our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Ricky E. Scoville - M2006-01684-CCA-R3-CD View
Marshall County - The Appellant, Ricky E. Scoville, appeals his misdemeanor convictions by a Marshall County jury for the crimes of aggravated criminal trespass and criminal littering. On appeal, Scoville raises two issues for our review: (1) whether evidence of prior acts by Scoville was improperly admitted at trial; and (2) whether the evidence presented at trial was legally sufficient to support the convictions. Following a review of the record, we conclude that Scoville’s first issue is waived, as it was not raised in the motion for new trial. We further conclude that the evidence presented at trial was more than sufficient to support the convictions. Accordingly, the judgments of conviction are affirmed.

State vs. Grady W. Lewis - E2006-02149-CCA-R3-CD View
Sullivan County - The defendant, Grady Wayne Lewis, appeals the trial court’s denial of alternative sentencing stemming from his guilty plea to one count of possession of drug paraphernalia and one count of violation of the open container law. After review, we affirm the judgments from the trial court.

State vs. Gamal Edham - W2007-00151-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - The Defendant, Gamal Edham, appeals the trial court’s order denying his motion to withdraw his guilty plea to one count of selling beer to a minor, arguing that because of his limited ability to understand English, his guilty plea was not knowingly and voluntarily entered. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Anthony McKinnis - W2006-00996-CCA-R3-CD View
Lauderdale County - The defendant, Anthony McKinnis, was convicted of the unlawful possession of a controlled substance (marijuana) with the intent to deliver (Class E felony), violation of the open container law (Class C misdemeanor), and the unlawful possession of a weapon (Class C misdemeanor), to wit: a .38 caliber revolver. He was sentenced to two years of incarceration, with all but 120 days suspended, for the felony conviction and was assessed a fine of $2500. Additionally, after completion of his incarceration, the defendant was placed on Community Corrections for one year and, if successful, the remainder would be served on probation. On appeal, he contends that the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions, that the trial court erred in overruling his objection to questioning regarding his employer’s prior drug convictions, and that the court erred in sentencing. After review, we conclude that no error exists, and we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

State vs. Roy Williams - W2006-02128-CCA-R3-PC View
Shelby County - The Petitioner, Roy R. Williams, appeals the post-conviction court’s order dismissing his petition for post-conviction relief. The Petitioner argues that his conviction for murder during the perpetration of a felony should be set aside because his trial attorneys failed to properly investigate a possible insanity defense and because they coerced him to plead guilty by making him fearful of receiving the death penalty. Following our review, we affirm the post-conviction court’s order of dismissal.

Cases posted the week of 09/03/2007
Martin E. Walker vs. Howard Carlton, Warden - E2006-01584-CCA-R3-HC View
Johnson County - The petitioner appeals from the Johnson County Criminal Court’s denying him habeas corpus relief from his 1986 second degree murder conviction and resulting sentence of not less than nor more than twenty-five years. The petitioner essentially contends that the trial court was without jurisdiction (1) to accept his plea and to sentence him without counsel present, (2) to sentence him without designating a release eligibility percentage, and (3) to sentence him under Class X sentencing which had been abolished prior to the sentencing. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Kimberly E. Cunningham - E2006-00189-CCA-R3-CD View
Blount County - The State of Tennessee tried the defendant, Kimberly E. Cunningham, for the second degree murder of the victim, Coy Hundley, see T.C.A. § 39-13-210 (2006), who was cohabiting with the defendant’s sister and fathered the sister’s children. A Knox County Criminal Court jury convicted the defendant of voluntary manslaughter. See id. § 39-13-211. The defendant killed the victim because he allegedly raped her youngest daughter. The trial court sentenced the defendant to four years in the Department of Correction. On appeal, the defendant claims that (1) the evidence is insufficient to support the conviction of voluntary manslaughter; (2) the trial court erred in denying the defendant judicial diversion; (3) the sentence of four years was too lengthy; (4) the trial court erred in denying probation; and (5) the trial court erred in denying other alternative sentencing. We hold that the evidence is sufficient, and we hold that the trial court neither erred in denying judicial diversion nor erred in denying full probation. However, upon our de novo review of the rehabilitation factor relating to alternative sentencing, we sentence the defendant to serve six months in confinement and the remaining three years and six months on supervised probation. In addition, she must perform 120 hours of community service as a condition of her post-confinement probation.

Floyd "Butch" Webb vs. State - E2006-02352-CCA-R3-PC View
Rhea County - The Petitioner, Floyd “Butch” Webb, appeals the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief claiming he did not receive the effective assistance of counsel. After a thorough review of the record and applicable law, we conclude the Petitioner was denied the effective assistance of counsel in three of his four misdemeanor child abuse convictions (Counts 1, 3, and 4). We also conclude that the Petitioner received the effective assistance of counsel in his convictions for child abuse (Count 2), aggravated sexual battery (Count 7), and two counts of sexual battery (Counts 9 and 11). Accordingly, we affirm in part and reverse in part the post-conviction court’s judgment, and we dismiss the Petitioner’s convictions in Counts 1, 3, and 4.

State vs. Robert Barnes - W2006-00578-CCA-R3-PC View
Lauderdale County - Following a jury trial, the petitioner, Robert S. Barnes, was convicted of reckless endangerment, attempted rape, robbery, aggravated burglary, and assault. For his convictions, the petitioner was sentenced as a career offender to an effective sentence of forty-five years for the felony convictions, plus consecutive sentences of eleven months and twenty-nine days for each of the two misdemeanor convictions. On direct appeal, this court affirmed the judgments of the trial court. State v. Robert Sanford Barnes, No. W2003-02967-CCA-R3-CD, 2005 WL 331376 (Tenn. Crim. App., at Jackson, Feb. 11, 2005). The petitioner filed a timely petition for post-conviction relief which the post-conviction court subsequently denied after an evidentiary hearing. The petitioner now appeals. In this appeal, the petitioner contends that his trial counsel was ineffective. Following a thorough review of the record and the applicable law, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

State vs. Rhonda Wilkins - W2006-02763-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - The appellant, Rhonda Wilkins, pled guilty in the Shelby County Criminal Court to one count of aggravated assault and received a sentence of three years. The appellant requested that the trial court grant her judicial diversion, and the trial court denied the request. However, the appellant’s sentence was suspended, and she was placed on probation. On appeal, the appellant challenges the denial of judicial diversion. Upon our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Margie Frances Hamby - E2006-01484-CCA-R3-CD View
A Blount County jury convicted the defendant, Margie Frances Hamby, of attempted theft of property valued under $500, and the trial court sentenced her to six months, with thirty days in jail and the balance to be served on supervised probation. On appeal, the defendant contends that the trial court erred in not granting her full probation. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Larry Arnell Adams vs. State - E2006-02409-CCA-R3-PC View
Knox County - The petitioner, Larry Arnell Adams, was convicted of multiple offenses and received an effective sentence of thirty-seven years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. This court affirmed the petitioner’s sentence on direct appeal. State v. Larry Arnell Adams, No. E2002-03046-CCA-R3-CD, 2004 WL 1467436 (Tenn. Crim. App. June 30, 2004). In November 2005, the petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel based primarily on failure to call witnesses identified by the petitioner. Counsel was appointed, a hearing was held in Knox County Criminal Court, and the trial court denied relief. The petitioner appeals the trial court’s ruling. After reviewing the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. William Joshua Harwood - E2006-01483-CCA-R3-CD View
Hamilton County - The defendant, William Joshua Harwood, appeals as of right from his Hamilton County Criminal Court convictions for attempt to manufacture methamphetamine and two counts of theft of property valued at over one thousand dollars. On appeal, he argues that the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions because they are based upon the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice. The state concedes in its brief that the convictions should be reversed and dismissed for this reason. Following our review, we agree. Accordingly, the convictions are reversed and dismissed.

State vs. Terrance Burke - W2006-02131-CCA-R3-PC View
Shelby County - The Appellant, Terrance Burke, appeals the judgment of the Shelby County Criminal Court denying his petition for post-conviction relief. On appeal, Burke argues that he was denied his Sixth Amendment right to the effective assistance of counsel. After a review of the record, we affirm the denial of post-conviction relief.

State vs. Sherman Clark - W2006-02594-CCA-R3-HC View
Shelby County - The Petitioner, Sherman Clark, appeals the trial court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief. The State has filed a motion requesting that this Court affirm the trial court's denial of relief pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals. The Petitioner fails to assert a cognizable claim for which habeas corpus relief may be granted. Accordingly, the State's motion is granted and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

State vs. Allen Oliver - W2007-00518-CCA-R3-HC View
Lauderdale County - The Petitioner, Allen Oliver, appeals the lower court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief. The State has filed a motion requesting that this Court affirm the trial court pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals. The Petitioner has failed to assert a ground that would entitle him to habeas corpus relief. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's dismissal.

Cases posted the week of 08/27/2007
Neil Lincoln Miller vs. Howard Carlton, Warden - E2006-02348-CCA-R3-HC View
Johnson County - The petitioner, Neil Lincoln Miller, appeals the summary dismissal of his petition for habeas corpus relief. He contends that his sentence is illegal. Because the record and law establish that the petitioner is not entitled to habeas corpus relief, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Daniel Ray Clayton - E2006-01274-CCA-R3-CD View
Blount County - The defendant, Daniel Ray Clayton, pleaded guilty to theft of property over $1,000 but less than $10,000, see T.C.A. §§ 39-14-103, -14-105(3) (2006), a class D felony and aggravated robbery, see id. § 39-13-402, a class B felony. According to the plea agreement, the sentences were to run concurrently, but the length and manner of service were to be determined by the trial court. The trial court held an evidentiary hearing on June 7, 2006, and sentenced the defendant to two years for the theft conviction and nine years for the aggravated robbery conviction for an effective nine-year sentence to be served in confinement. On appeal, the defendant argues that the trial court erred in failing to consider certain mitigating factors and claims that his sentence should be reduced to eight years. We disagree and affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Nathaniel Starr - E2006-01922-CCA-R3-CD View
Knox County - The defendant, Nathaniel Starr, appeals as of right his bench trial conviction for aggravated robbery, a Class B felony, for which he received a sentence of twenty-five years as a Range III, persistent offender. On appeal, he alleges that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction for aggravated robbery and that the trial court erred in finding him to be a persistent offender. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

David Wayne Dunn vs. Howard Carlton, Warden - E2007-00355-CCA-R3-HC View
Johnson County - The pro se petitioner, David Wayne Dunn, appeals from the Johnson County Criminal Court’s summary dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus attacking his 1985 first degree murder conviction. He alleges that he is entitled to relief because the indictment is duplicitous and the judgment represents an illegal general verdict. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Barbara Watson - E2006-02275-CCA-R3-CD View
Morgan County - The defendant, Barbara Watson, appeals as of right her conviction for theft of property valued at over one thousand dollars, a Class D felony, resulting from her bench trial in the Morgan County Criminal Court. On appeal, she asserts that there was insufficient proof of the value of property stolen and, absent such proof, the conviction should be for theft of property valued under five hundred dollars, a misdemeanor. She also argues that the trial court’s restitution order of $3, 926.11 is not supported by the evidence. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Fred Eugene Thompson, Jr. - M2006-00292-CCA-R3-CD View
Davidson County - A Davidson County jury convicted the Defendant of first degree felony murder and theft of property valued over $1000. He was sentenced to life in prison for the first degree murder conviction and to five years for the theft conviction, and the trial court ordered the sentences to run concurrently. On appeal, the Defendant contends that: (1) the trial court erred when it denied his motion for a judgment of acquittal at the close of the State’s proof; (2) the evidence is insufficient to sustain his convictions; and (3) the trial court failed to perform its role as a thirteenth juror. We affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Matthew Jackson vs. State - M2007-00385-CCA-R3-PC View
Davidson County - This matter is before the Court upon the State’s motion to dismiss or in the alternative to affirm the judgment of the trial court by memorandum opinion pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals. Petitioner has appealed the trial court’s order dismissing his petition for post-conviction relief in which Petitioner alleged that his guilty plea was based on a coerced confession, he was denied the right to counsel, he was denied the right to speedy trial, evidence was obtained unconstitutionally, and the trial court made factual conclusions that were not supported by the record. Upon a review of the record in this case, we are persuaded that the trial court was correct in summarily dismissing the petition for post-conviction relief and that this case meets the criteria for affirmance pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals. Accordingly, the State’s motion is granted, and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

State vs. Eric James Osborne - M2006-00888-CCA-R3-CD View
Davidson County - Following a jury trial, Defendant, Eric James Osborne, was found guilty of seven counts of rape of a child, a Class A felony, and five counts of aggravated sexual battery, a Class B felony. The trial court declared a mistrial on two counts of rape of a child and one count of aggravated sexual battery because the jury was unable to reach a verdict on these charges. The trial court conducted a sentencing hearing after which it sentenced Defendant to twenty-five years for each rape of a child conviction and eleven years for each aggravated sexual battery conviction. The trial court ordered Defendant to serve a combination of consecutive and concurrent sentences for an effective sentence of one hundred and seventy-two years. On appeal, Defendant argues that (1) the trial court erred in denying Defendant’s motion to sever the offenses involving different victims; (2) the trial court erred in denying Defendant’s motion for a mistrial; (3) the evidence is insufficient to support Defendant’s convictions in counts 14 and 15 of the superseding indictment; (4) the trial court erred in allowing testimony concerning prior bad acts; (5) the trial court erred in ruling that Defendant’s prior conviction of child abuse would be admissible for impeachment purposes; and (6) that the trial court erred in determining the length and manner of service of Defendant’s sentences. After a thorough review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

State vs. Jack N. Taylor - E2006-02719-CCA-R3-CD View
Loudon County - The defendant, Jack N. Taylor, was convicted of robbery, a Class C felony, and sentenced to three years in the community corrections program. On appeal, he argues that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Laraiel Winton vs. State - E2006-02392-CCA-R3-PC View
Knox County - The petitioner, Laraiel Winton, pro se, appeals the Knox County Criminal Court’s denial of his petition for post-conviction relief which alleged that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel on direct appeal. On appeal, he alleges that the trial court erred in denying him relief and that the trial court failed to make sufficient findings of fact in its order denying relief. Following our review, we agree that the trial court failed to make sufficient findings of fact and further conclude that the trial court’s erroneous restriction of the presentation of evidence resulted in a denial of the petitioner’s right to a full and fair hearing regarding the allegation of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel. Therefore, the judgment of the trial court is reversed and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

State vs. Marty Clark - W2006-01343-CCA-R3-CD View
Madison County - The defendant, Marty Michelle Clark, was convicted of attempted aggravated burglary, a Class D felony, and was sentenced by the trial court as a Range II offender to six years in confinement. The defendant appeals his conviction, arguing that the trial court lacked sufficient evidence to sustain his conviction. Upon review of the full record and the applicable law, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Scott Magness - W2006-01608-CA-R3-CD View
Hardin County - The defendant, Scott Christopher Magness, appeals as of right from the sentence of confinement imposed by the Hardin County Circuit Court for his conviction of attempted aggravated sexual battery, a Class C felony. As a Range I, standard offender, the defendant received a sentence of six years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the defendant contends that the trial court erred by denying alternative sentencing. We affirm the trial court.

James A. Dellinger vs. State - E2005-01485-CCA-R3-PD View
Blount County - The petitioner, James A. Dellinger, appeals as of right from the order of the Blount County Circuit Court denying his petition for post-conviction relief from his 1992 conviction for first degree murder and resulting death sentence. The petitioner claims that (1) this court should review the trial court’s opinion in its entirety under a purely de novo standard of review; (2) an incorrect and unconstitutional burden of proof has been applied to the petitioner’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel; (3) his conviction and death sentence violate his rights to due process because he is actually innocent of the conviction offense; (4) the state withheld exculpatory information at the trial; (5) counsel provided ineffective assistance to him at trial and on appeal;(6) the petitioner was not afforded a full and fair hearing of his post-conviction petition in violation of his due process rights; (7) the death sentence is unconstitutional because it infringes upon the petitioner’s fundamental right to life; (8) the aggravating factor used in support of the death sentence was not included in the indictment and returned by the grand jury; (9) Tennessee’s death sentence is unconstitutional because prosecutors are given absolute discretion to pursue or to forego the pursuit of the death sentence in each case; (10) execution by lethal injection violates the principles against cruel and unusual punishment; (11) the petitioner’s conviction and death sentence are in violation of international law; and (12) Tennessee’s death penalty scheme is unconstitutional. We conclude that no error exists, and we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Roger Gene Davis - E2006-02045-CCA-R3-CD View
Knox County - A Knox County jury convicted the Defendant of aggravated assault, one count of theft, Class D felony theft, and misdemeanor vandalism, and the trial court sentenced him to an effective sentence of thirteen years. On appeal, the Defendant contends that: (1) the evidence is insufficient to sustain his convictions for aggravated assault and theft; (2) the trial court improperly allowed testimony that the Defendant had kidnapped the victim the night before this incident; and (3) the trial court improperly imposed consecutive sentences. Finding that there exists no error, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

State vs. Michael Wayne Poe - E2006-02551-CCA-R3-CD View
Hamilton County - The Defendant, Michael Wayne Poe, appeals from the trial court’s determination that he violated the terms of his probation by abusing and killing his infant son. Because substantial evidence supports the trial court’s judgment, we affirm.

State vs. David Harold Hanson - E2006-00883-CCA-R3-CD View
Alternate View, both Concurring and Dissenting - View
Anderson County - The defendant, David Harold Hanson, was convicted of aggravated child abuse a Class A felony, and received a sentence of eighteen years imprisonment. On appeal, the defendant raises the following issues: (1) whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain his conviction; (2) whether the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the definition of “accidental means” as submitted by the defendant; (3) whether the trial court improperly instructed the jury on the “knowing” element of aggravated child abuse; and (4) whether the trial court erred by giving sequential jury instructions. Following our review of the record, the parties’ briefs and the applicable law, we conclude that the evidence was insufficient to prove that the defendant possessed the requisite mental state for aggravated child abuse; and therefore, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and dismiss the case.

State vs. Jarvis Harris - W2006-02234-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - The defendant, Jarvis Harris, was convicted of first degree premeditated murder and attempted first degree murder and sentenced to concurrent terms of life imprisonment and eighteen years. On appeal, he argues: (1) the trial court erred in denying his motion in limine to exclude references to gang affiliation and the State made improper comments about gang membership during opening and closing statements; (2) the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress his statements; and (3) the trial court imposed an excessive sentence. Based on our review, we affirm the judgments of conviction but remand for appropriate resentencing for the attempted first degree murder conviction.

Cases posted the week of 08/20/2007
Michael H. Cammon vs. State - M2006-01823-CCA-R3-PC View
Rutherford County - The petitioner, Michael H. Cammon, appeals the post-conviction court’s denial of relief. He contends that he received ineffective assistance from both trial and appellate counsel. He further contends that the rulings of the post-conviction court were not timely and violated the Post-Conviction Procedure Act because the court did not issue written findings of fact and conclusions of law. After review, we affirm the judgment from the post-conviction court.

State vs. Lachanta Monique Tyler -M2006-00878-CCA-R3-CD View
Davidson County - The defendant, Lachanta Monique Tyler, was convicted by a Davidson County jury of aggravated assault, a Class C felony, and theft of property involving merchandise valued at $500 or less, a Class A misdemeanor. See T.C.A. §§ 39-13-102; 39-14-103; 39-14-105; 39-14-146. She was sentenced to three years for the aggravated assault conviction and eleven months and twenty-nine days for the theft conviction, with the sentences imposed concurrently and to be served on probation. The defendant appeals, claiming (1) that the evidence was insufficient to support her conviction of aggravated assault, (2) that the trial court erred in denying her motion for judgment of acquittal on aggravated assault, (3) that the trial court erred in failing to sever these offenses from two other offenses of which she was acquitted, (4) that the court erred by admitting prior bad act evidence of a prior shoplifting incident. Upon review, we affirm the defendant’s theft conviction, modify the aggravated assault conviction to assault, and remand the case for imposition of judgment on the assault conviction including a sentence of eleven months and twenty-nine days to be served on probation and concurrently with the theft sentence.

State vs. Bradley Ferrell - M2005-02552-CCA-R3-CD View
Dissenting Opinion - View
Van Buren County - The defendant, Bradley Ferrell, was convicted by a Van Buren County jury of escape, a Class A misdemeanor, and was sentenced by the trial court to eleven months, twenty-nine days, suspended after service of sixty days in the county jail. On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred in finding him competent to stand trial, in not permitting his expert witness to testify about his incapacity to form the requisite intent for the crime, in refusing his request for a special jury instruction on diminished capacity, and in overruling his motion for a new trial. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Gene S. Rucker vs. State - E2007-00380-CCA-R3-PC View
Hamilton County - The petitioner, Gene S. Rucker, appeals the Hamilton County Criminal Court’s summary dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. Relying upon Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals Rule 20, the State has moved this court to summarily affirm the criminal court’s order. Because the record before us indicates that the post-conviction petition was filed outside the statute of limitations, we grant the motion and affirm the criminal court’s order.

State vs. William Graham - W2006-00173-CCA-R3-CD View
Madison County - The defendant, William Phillip Graham, was convicted of aggravated rape, a Class A felony, at a jury trial in the Madison County Circuit Court. He is presently serving a twenty-year sentence as a Violent Offender in the Department of Correction. In this appeal, he argues 1) that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction; 2) that the trial court erred in denying his petition to compel attendance of an out-of-state witness; 3) that the trial court made erroneous rulings during the trial relative to the scope of redirect examination of a state’s witness; 4) that the court erred in denying his request to make an offer of proof after an adverse evidentiary ruling; 5) that the court erred in allowing the state to recall the victim during its case-in-chief; and 6) that the trial court erred in denying the defendant’s requests for curative instructions relative to two aspects of the prosecutor’s closing argument. We conclude that no reversible error occurred, and we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Constanica Reyes - W2006-02232-CCA-R3-PC View
Shelby County - The petitioner, Constancia Reyes, pled guilty in the Shelby County Criminal Court to possession of three hundred grams or more of cocaine with intent to sell and agreed to a fifteen-year sentence as a Range I, standard offender. Subsequently, she filed a petition for post-conviction relief, claiming that she received the ineffective assistance of counsel because her trial attorney failed to file a motion to suppress the evidence seized as a result of her traffic stop and that she was coerced into pleading guilty. The post-conviction court denied the petition for post-conviction relief, and the petitioner appeals. Upon review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

State vs. John Payne Russell - E2006-01611-CCA-R3-CD View
Blount County -The defendant, John Payne Russell, pleaded guilty in Blount County Circuit Court to aggravated assault, see T.C.A. § 39-13-102 (2006), and aggravated burglary, see id. § 39-14-403, on September 8, 2003. He received a three-year, suspended sentence for each count to run concurrently, and as a condition of his plea agreement, he was to complete the Steps program. On October 31, 2003, a violation of probation warrant was filed because the defendant was arrested for public intoxication, see id. § 39-17-310, and he failed to complete the Steps program. The court ordered the defendant to serve 90 days in jail and then to return to probation. After serving jail time, the defendant enrolled in and completed an eight-month in-patient drug treatment program, House of Hope in Indiana. He then returned to supervised probation, and another probation violation warrant was filed July 18, 2006 and alleged that the defendant had used illegal drugs, missed appointments, and failed to pay probation fees and court costs. After an evidentiary hearing on July 31, 2006, the trial court revoked the defendant’s probation and ordered him to serve his sentence in confinement. The defendant appeals the revocation, and we affirm the trial court’s order.

State vs. Drexsel Green - M2006-01296-CCA-R3-CD View
Davidson County - The defendant, Drexsel Green, appeals his Davidson County Criminal Court conviction of first-offense driving under the influence (DUI), a Class A misdemeanor. See T.C.A. §§ 55-10-401(a)(1), -403(a)(1) ( 2004). After the trial court denied the defendant’s motion to suppress evidence acquired after the police had detained him, the defendant pleaded guilty in the trial court but reserved, via certified questions of law, the search and seizure issue for appeal. The focus of the Fourth-Amendment problem in this case is the legitimacy of a police officer’s approach and initial questioning of the defendant at the serving counter in a Waffle House restaurant. Although the certified questions are properly reserved, the record supports the trial court’s denial of the defendant’s motion to suppress evidence, and we affirm the criminal court’s judgment.

State vs. Terna Hatten - E2006-01923-CCA-R3-CD View
Hamilton County - The defendant, Terna Hatten, appeals the five-year sentence he received after pleading guilty to aggravated assault, a Class C felony. He argues that the length of the imposed sentence was too long and that the trial court erred in enhancing his sentence beyond the minimum of three years. After review, we affirm the judgment from the trial court.

State vs. Jerry W. Tullos - E2006-01833-CCA-R3-CD View
Bledsoe County - The defendant, Jerry W. Tullos, was convicted by a Bledsoe County jury of aggravated assault, a Class C felony, and was sentenced to four years imprisonment as a Range I offender. On appeal, he argues that: the prosecutor’s closing argument was improper, the trial court erred in not giving the jury a charge on intoxication, the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction, and the trial court erred in sentencing him to four years in confinement. Upon our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Melinda Jo Fisher Spakes - E2006-00573-CCA-R3-CD View
Rhea County - The defendant, Melinda Jo Fisher Spakes, appeals the denial of judicial diversion or alternative sentencing following her “best-interests” pleas to two counts of misdemeanor child neglect. See T.C.A. § 39-15-401 (1997). After review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

State vs. James Beasley - W2006-01844-CCA-MR3-PC View
Madison County - The petitioner, James Beasley, appeals from the Madison County Circuit Court’s denying him post-conviction relief from his convictions for aggravated burglary, a Class C felony, and theft of property valued at $500 or less, a Class A misdemeanor. See T.C.A. §§ 39-14-403; 39-14-103; 39-14-105(1). He was sentenced to fifteen years and eleven months and twenty-nine days, to be served concurrently as a Range III offender. The petitioner contends the trial court erred in denying him post-conviction relief based upon the ineffective assistance of trial counsel. We conclude that no error exists and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

State vs. Freddie McCullough - W2006-01407-CCA-R3-CD View
Shelby County - The Appellant, Freddie McCullough, appeals the Shelby County Criminal Court’s denial of his request for non-incarcerative alternative sentences. McCullough pled guilty to one count of statutory rape and one count of sexual battery, both Class E felonies, and, under the terms of the plea agreement, received one-year sentences for each conviction with the trial court determining the manner of service of the sentences. The agreement also allowed McCullough to seek judicial diversion. After a sentencing hearing, the trial court denied judicial diversion and ordered McCullough to serve concurrent terms of sixty days in the workhouse on each one-year sentence, followed by one year of probation. On appeal, McCullough argues that the trial court erred by denying judicial diversion or, in the alternative, total probation. After review, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Ricky Barnett vs. State - M2006-02243-CCA-R3-PC View
Davidson County - Petitioner pled guilty to two counts of child rape and one count of child abuse. His effective sentence is twenty-five years, twenty-two years to be served concurrently for each child rape and three years for child abuse to be served consecutively to the twenty-two years. Within a year of his guilty plea, Petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief arguing that his trial counsel was ineffective and, therefore, his plea was not entered knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily. Petitioner argued that his trial counsel was ineffective for: (1) not adequately explaining the nature and consequences of his guilty plea; (2) not adequately investigating the facts of the Petitioner’s case; (3) not adequately consulting with him prior to entering his plea; and (4) not having Petitioner undergo a mental health screening. Following a full hearing, the post-conviction court denied the petition. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the denial of the petition.

State vs. Antonio Dante Edmondson - M2006-00990-CCA-R3-CD View
Davidson County - The defendant, Antonio Dante Edmondson, was convicted at a jury trial of two counts of facilitation of aggravated robbery, Class C felonies. He received two five-year terms to be served consecutively in the Department of Correction, for an effective sentence of ten years. In this appeal, he claims (1) that the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions, (2) that the trial court erred in admitting proof of other robberies under Tennessee Rule of Evidence 404(b), and (3) that he was improperly sentenced. We affirm the judgments of the trial court.

James Eric Winston vs. State - M2006-01699-CCA-R3-PC View
Davidson County- The petitioner, James Eric Winston, sought post-conviction relief in the Davidson County Criminal County Court in the form of deoxyriboneculeic acid (DNA) analysis of physical evidence associated with his 1992 Davidson County aggravated rape convictions. The criminal court ordered the DNA analysis, but after reviewing the results, the court dismissed the petition. On appeal, the petitioner claims that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance, that the public defender’s office, which represented the petitioner in his 1993 trial, had a conflict of interests that should have precluded a public defender from representing him in the criminal court on the post-conviction DNA proceeding now under review, and the DNA test results establish his claim of actual innocence of aggravated rape. These appellate claims are unsupported in the record, and therefore, we affirm the order of the criminal court.

State vs. Michael Bates - W2006-02492-CCA-R3-CD View
Madison County - The appellant, Michael Ray Bates, was convicted in the Madison County Circuit Court of four counts of selling one-half gram or more of cocaine and received an effective ten-year sentence to be served in a community corrections program. Subsequently, the trial court revoked the appellant’s community corrections sentence and ordered him to serve his ten-year sentence in confinement. On appeal, the appellant challenges the revocation of his community corrections sentence and the imposition of confinement. Upon review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Jimmy DeWayne Lentz - M2006-01774-CCA-R3-CD View
Marshall county - Following a jury trial, Defendant, Jimmy Dewayne Lentz, was convicted of vandalism, a Class C felony. The trial court denied Defendant’s request for alternative sentencing and sentenced Defendant to five years, six months in confinement. On appeal, Defendant argues that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury’s finding that the value of the property vandalized was in excess of $10,000. Defendant does not appeal the trial court’s denial of alternative sentencing but argues that the trial court erred in determining the length of his sentence. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Michael Vaughn - M2006-01341-CCA-R3-CD View
Humphreys County - Appellant, Michael Vaughn, was convicted of attempt to commit manufacture of methamphetamine, one count of possession of unlawful drug paraphernalia for delivery, one count of reckless endangerment with a deadly weapon, one count of evading arrest, one count of possession of a weapon by a convicted felon, one count of possession of marijuana, and one count of possession of drug paraphernalia. As a result, Appellant was sentenced to a total effective sentence of twenty-four years. After the denial of a motion for new trial, Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal. On appeal, Appellant argues that there was no probable cause for the stop, search and seizure that led to Appellant’s arrest and that the trial court erred in sentencing Appellant. Because Appellant did not file a motion to suppress prior to trial and failed to raise the suppression issue in a motion for new trial, this issue is waived. Furthermore, we determine that the trial court properly sentenced appellant. Accordingly, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

State vs. Alecia Diane Cooper - M2006-02618-CCA-R3-CD View
Bedford County - The defendant, Alecia Diane Cooper, appeals her Bedford County Circuit Court jury convictions of attempt to commit assault, see T.C.A. §§ 39-13-101(a)(3) (2006) & 39-12-101 (2006), and disorderly conduct, see id. § 39-17-305, Class C misdemeanors. The convictions resulted from a confrontation between a security officer at the 2005 Tennessee Walking Horse National Celebration in Shelbyville and the defendant, who was a competitor and sponsor in the Celebration. On appeal, the defendant claims that the evidence was insufficient to support both convictions.

State vs. Sherman Tyler Rumsey - M2007-00093-CCA-R3-CD View
Cannon County - The appellant, Sherman Tyler Rumsey, was convicted in the Cannon County Circuit Court of aggravated burglary, and he received a three-year suspended sentence. After the appellant’s probation was revoked, he filed a motion for a suspension of sentence. The trial court dismissed the motion, and the appellant appeals. Upon our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Ronnie Sims vs. State - M2006-02746-CCA-R3-PC View
Davidson County - The Petitioner, Ronnie Sims, appeals the post-conviction court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief, arguing that relief is warranted because his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to obtain an audiotape recording of the victim’s emergency telephone call to the Vanderbilt University Police Department and for failing to thoroughly investigate an alibi witness. Following our review, we affirm the post-conviction court’s order denying relief.

Donovan Davis vs. State - M2007-00409-CCA-R3-HC View
Davidson County- Petitioner, Donovan Davis, filed a Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus attacking his 1998 convictions for facilitation of felony murder and aggravated robbery, for which he received consecutive sentences for a total effective sentence of thirty (30) years. The trial court summarily dismissed the petition without an evidentiary hearing. Petitioner has appealed, arguing that (1) the sentences were imposed in direct violation of his constitutional rights to have a jury determine sentencing enhancement factors, and (2) the habeas corpus trial court erroneously relied upon Petitioner’s waiver of appeal of his convictions and sentencing. The State has filed a motion to affirm pursuant to Rule 20 of the Rules of the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals. Finding the motion to be well-taken, it is hereby granted. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Cases posted the week of 08/13/2007
Arthur W. Stamey vs. State and Virginia Lewis, Warden - E2006-02047-CCA-R3-HC View
Bledsoe County - The petitioner, Arthur W. Stamey, appeals the Bledsoe County Circuit Court’s summary dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The petitioner was convicted pursuant to a guilty plea of one count of aggravated sexual battery and received a sentence of nine years as a violent offender. The petitioner contends that his guilty plea was involuntary and that his sentence was illegal due to the original trial court’s imposition as a condition of release that he not be around children for the rest of his life, which he claims is in contravention of the statutory authority afforded the Board of Probation and Parole pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-13-524. The habeas corpus court summarily dismissed the petition. Following our review, we conclude that the original trial court had no authority to impose such a condition, and we reverse the judgment of the habeas corpus court and remand the case for the entry of an order to remand the case to the original trial court for the entry of a corrected judgment.

State vs. Richard Swiney - E2006-01965-CCA-R3-CD View
Sullivan County - The defendant, Richard Swiney, pleaded guilty in case numbers S49,056; S51,657; and S51,658 to various offenses. He received a four-year suspended sentence in case number S49,056 to run consecutively to the effective six-year sentence in case numbers S51,657 and S51,658. The manner of service for the effective six-year sentence in case numbers S51,657 and S51,658 was determined by the trial court after an evidentiary hearing, and the court ordered the defendant to serve the six years in confinement. The defendant appeals the trial court’s order of confinement, and we affirm that order. However, we remand for the correction of several clerical errors in the judgments.

Brandon Roland vs. State - E2006-02785-CCA-R3-PC View
Rhea County - The petitioner, Brandon Roland, who was convicted of first degree murder and theft over $10,000, sought post-conviction relief from the Rhea County Circuit Court, which denied relief after an evidentiary hearing. On appeal, the petitioner presents several issues of the ineffective assistance of counsel. We affirm the denial of post-conviction relief.

State vs. Tazwone DeMarcus Mattress - E2006-00862-CCA-R3-CD View
Knox County - Following a jury trial, Defendant, Tazwone Demarcus Mattress, was found guilty of second degree murder. The trial court sentenced Defendant as a Range I, standard offender, to twenty-five years imprisonment, and ordered Defendant’s sentence for his felony conviction to be served consecutively to two outstanding misdemeanor sentences. On appeal, Defendant argues that (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction; (2) the trial court erred in permitting the State to introduce evidence of Defendant’s prior juvenile adjudications; and (3) the trial court erred in imposing consecutive sentences. Defendant does not challenge the length of his sentence for his murder conviction. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Eric Wayne Agner - E2006-01616-CCA-R3-CD View
Blount County - The defendant, E