State vs. Sylvester Farmer
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Reginald Tutton
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Larry Englet
|
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Darrell Emerson
|
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Sharon Melton In Re: City Bonding Compnay d/b/a A-1 Bonding Company
|
Franklin | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Larry Hart
|
Hardin | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Michael Underwood
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Michael Dinkins
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. James Mabry
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Larry Torres
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Gregory Jackson
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Shannon Young
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Earl Lee
|
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Larry Baxter
|
Hardin | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Steven Newman
|
Decatur | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Tracy Pitts
|
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Woodrow Wilson vs. State
|
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Offender. This Court Affirmed The Appellant'S Sentences, State v. James T. Fite, No. 89-
|
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Tommy Blevins vs. State
|
Putnam | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Patricia Lishman
|
McNairy | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Willie Taylor
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Earnest Hawkins
|
Lake | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Freddie Russell
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Marvin Matthews
|
Lauderdale | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee vs. Gary Raines, Debra Raines and Jerry Raines
Following the denial of their motion to suppress evidence, the Defendants, Gary Raines and Debra Raines ple d guilty in the Circuit Court of Cheatham County to possession of marijuana for resale and possession of drug paraphernalia, and Defendant Jerry Raines pled guilty to simple possession of marijuana and possession of drug paraphernalia. In their pleas, Defendants reserved the right to appeal the trial court’s d enial of their motion to suppress as a certified question of law pursuant to Rule 3(b) of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure and Rules 11(e) and 37(b)(2)(I) of the Tennessee Rules of Criminal Procedure. Specifically, the certified question is: “Whether or not the initial entry upon the premises and the subsequent consent search was legal.” We affirm the judgment of the trial court, as modified to correct an apparent clerical error. |
Cheatham | Court of Criminal Appeals |
