Maxine O. Mason v. Kenneth M. Seaton and Wife, Laurel Seaton, D/B/A Grand Hotel
This case presents for review the decision of the Court of PPeals, reversing the trial court, that the action of retaliatory discharge "for refusing to remain silent about illegal activities" does not require a showing that the employer expressly or implicitly directed the employee to remain silent about the illegal activitey. This Court affirms the decision and ratoinale of the Court of Appeals. |
Sevier | Supreme Court | |
Michael Dean Bush v. State of Tennessee
In this capital case, the defendant, Michael Dean Bush, was convicted of Although not relevant to this appeal, the trial judge imposed a three-year sentence concurrent to the death penalty for the burglary conviction. 2 "Whenever the death penalty is imposed for first degree murder and when the judgment has become final in the trial court, the defendant shall have the right of direct appeal from the trial court to the Court of Criminal Appeals. The affirmance of th e conviction and the sentence of death shall be automatically reviewed by the Tennessee Supreme Court. Upon the affirmance by the Court of C rim inal Appeals, th e clerk shall docket the case in the Supreme Court and the case sha ll proceed in accordance with the T ennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure.” -2- premeditated first degree murder and first degree burglary.1 In the sentencing hearing, the jury found two aggravating circumstances: (1) “[t]he murder was especially heinous, atrocious or cruel in that it involved torture or serious physical abuse beyond that necessary to produce death;” and (2) “[t]he murder was committed for the purpose of avoiding, interfering with or preventing a lawful arrest or prosecution of the defendant or another.” Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-204(i)(5) and (6) (1991). Finding that the two aggravating circumstances outweighed mitigating circumstances beyond a reasonable doubt, the jury sentenced the defendant to death by electrocution. |
Cumberland | Supreme Court | |
State vs/ John Farris Hunter, III
|
Marshall | Supreme Court | |
01S01-9608-OT-00167
|
Supreme Court | ||
Thomas vs State Bd. of Equalization
|
Davidson | Supreme Court | |
State vs. Martin
|
Davidson | Supreme Court | |
03S01-9603-CC-00023
|
Supreme Court | ||
03S01-9603-CV-00032
|
Supreme Court | ||
Reeser vs. Yellow Freight Systems
|
Supreme Court | ||
02S01-9509-CV-00074
|
Supreme Court | ||
02S01-9607-CH-00062
|
Supreme Court | ||
01S01-9511-CH-00208
|
Bedford | Supreme Court | |
01S01-9511-CH-00208
|
Bedford | Supreme Court | |
01S01-9511-CH-00208
|
Bedford | Supreme Court | |
M1997-00277-SC-OT-CV
|
Supreme Court | ||
01S01-9603-CV-00049
|
Supreme Court | ||
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Supreme Court | ||
03S01-9507-CH-00077
|
Union | Supreme Court | |
02S01-9605-CH-00049
|
Supreme Court | ||
01S01-9511-CH-00211
|
Supreme Court | ||
02S01-9604-CV-00044
|
Shelby | Supreme Court | |
State of Tennessee v. John Michael Denton and William Douglas Brown v. State of Tennessee
We granted review and consolidated these cases in order to consider the circumstances under which imposition of two convictions resulting from a "single" criminal act may violate the double jeopardy and du process clause of the state and federal constitutions in light of State v. Anthony, 817S.W. 2d299 (Tenn. 1991).
|
Davidson | Supreme Court | |
William Wesley Goad v. State of Tennessee
The primary issue in this appeal is whether the petitioner, William Wesley Goad, was afforded his constitutional right to effective assistance of counsel at the sentencing phase of his capital trial. |
Sumner | Supreme Court | |
Janice Holder v.Tennessee Judicial Selection Commission and George T. Lewis, III, Esq. in his official capacity as Chairperson of the Tennessee Judicial Selection Commission
The petition to rehear is denied. ENTER this the 2nd day of December, 1996. |
Davidson | Supreme Court | |
01S01-9507-CV-00102
|
Supreme Court |