State of Tennessee v. Clarence Bunton
A Shelby County Criminal Court jury convicted the appellant, Clarence Bunton, of attempted child rape, and the trial court sentenced him as a Range II, multiple offender to twelve years in confinement. The appellant appeals, claiming that the evidence is insufficient to support the conviction. Upon review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Deangelo Demond Johnson v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Deangelo Demond Johnson, pled guilty in the Knox County Criminal Court to possession of more than .5 grams of cocaine with the intent to sell, felony evading arrest, and driving on a suspended license. He received a total effective sentence of ten years. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief, alleging that his counsel was ineffective. The post-conviction court dismissed the petition, and the petitioner appeals. Upon our review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Corey C. Abernathy
The defendant, Corey C. Abernathy, was convicted after a bench trial of theft of property under $500, a Class A misdemeanor, and sentenced to eleven months, twenty-nine days, suspended to probation. On appeal, the defendant argues the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction. We conclude that the defendant was not questioned, as required, before being allowed to represent himself. Accordingly, we reverse the conviction and remand for a new trial. |
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Darrell Braddock v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Darrell Braddock, appeals the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief, arguing the post-conviction court erred in finding he received effective assistance of counsel. Following our review, we affirm the post-conviction court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Michael W. Smith v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Michael W. Smith, appeals the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief, raising as his sole issue whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to properly prepare and investigate his case. Following our review, we affirm the denial of the petition. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Richard Gastineau
The appellant, Richard Gastineau, pled guilty in the Shelby County Criminal Court to reckless driving, and the trial court sentenced him to a six-month suspended sentence and fined him five hundred dollars. The trial court also sua sponte ruled that the appellant had violated the implied consent law and revoked his driver’s license for one year. In this appeal, the appellant claims that the trial court erred by finding that he violated the implied consent law and by revoking his driver’s license. Upon review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we conclude that the trial court lacked jurisdiction over the implied consent law violation and reverse the judgment of the trial court. We also remand the case to the trial court in order for it to clarify on the record whether the appellant should receive judicial diversion for the reckless driving conviction. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Victor L. Powell
The defendant, Victor Powell, was convicted of two counts of vehicular homicide (by recklessness and by intoxication), three counts of vehicular assault, and two counts of driving under the influence. The conviction for vehicular homicide by recklessness was merged into the conviction for vehicular homicide by intoxication. In addition, both convictions for driving under the influence were merged into the conviction for vehicular homicide by intoxication. The trial court imposed consecutive sentences of twelve years for vehicular homicide and four years for each vehicular assault conviction. In this appeal, the defendant asserts that the evidence was insufficient and that the trial court erred by refusing to grant a second mental evaluation. The judgments of the trial court are affirmed. |
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Sidney Porterfield v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, Sidney Porterfield, was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to death. The Petitioner has exhausted his direct appeals and has previously pursued post-conviction relief. The Petitioner filed the instant habeas corpus petition asserting several claims regarding the validity of his sentence. The trial court summarily denied the petition. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Sheri Lynn Cox, alias
The appellee, Sherri Lynn Cox, was charged by presentment with theft of property valued between $1,000 and $10,000. The appellee moved to dismiss the presentment against her because a portion of the evidence against her had been lost. The trial court granted the motion, and the State appeals. Upon our review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Carolyn Wooster v. State of Tennessee
A Dickson County jury convicted the Petitioner, Carolyn Wooster, of aggravated child abuse and neglect and she was sentenced to fifteen years in prison. This court affirmed the conviction on direct appeal and the Tennessee Supreme Court denied review. The Petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, and the post-conviction court dismissed her petition. The Petitioner appeals, contending that her trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance of counsel at trial by failing to adequately investigate her case. After thoroughly reviewing the record and the applicable law, we conclude that there exists no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Dickson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Donte Collins
The Defendant, Donte Collins, was convicted of driving under the influence ("DUI") and DUI per se. The trial court found that the Defendant had three previous DUI convictions and sentenced him for DUI, fourth offense, a Class E felony. The Defendant now appeals, contending that: (1) that the evidence contained in the record is insufficient to sustain his convictions for DUI and DUI per se; (2) the trial court erred when it allowed a police officer to testify about "clues" he gleaned from field sobriety tests because that was improper scientific testimony; (3) the trial court erred when it allowed the State to impeach the Defendant with his prior conviction for "a felony involving theft"; and (4) the trial court erred when it instructed the jury that it could infer that the Defendant was intoxicated based solely on his blood alcohol level. Finding no reversible error, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Tony Duane Wade v. State of Tennessee
In three separate cases, the Defendant, Tony Duane Wade, pled guilty to two counts of forgery and two counts of aggravated burglary. In accordance with a plea agreement, the trial court sentenced the Defendant to an effective sentence of ten years, to be served on community corrections. Subsequently, the trial court found that the Defendant had violated his community corrections and ordered him to serve ten years. The Defendant now appeals contending that the trial court abused its discretion when it revoked his community corrections sentence. Finding no reversible error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Montgomery | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v.Jonathan D. Tears
A Marshall County jury convicted the Defendant of possession of .5 grams of cocaine with intent to sell, possession of .5 grams of cocaine with intent to deliver and possession of marijuana. The trial court merged the cocaine convictions into a single conviction for possession of cocaine with intent to sell and sentenced the Defendant to twelve years for that offense and to a concurrent sentence of eleven months, twenty-nine days for possession of marijuana. On appeal, the Defendant asserts that the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions and that the trial court erred when it denied him alternative sentencing. We find no error, thus, we affirm the judgements of the trial court. |
Marshall | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Jerry Faulkner a/k/a Joseph Faulkner v. State of Tennessee
On January 27, 2004, the Shelby County Criminal Court accepted the guilty pleas of Jerry Faulkner, also known as Joseph Faulkner, the petitioner, on three counts of aggravated robbery and a single count of aggravated rape. The effective 20-year sentence was imposed to run concurrently with another state sentence and “all Federal convictions.” On April 13, 2004, the petitioner, who was incarcerated in a federal facility in Memphis, filed a petition in the conviction court for a writ of habeas corpus. Because the petitioner was in federal custody, the habeas corpus court dismissed the petition, and the petitioner appealed. Following our review, we affirm the order of the habeas corpus court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Delores Christina Armstrong
The appellant, Delores Christina Armstrong, was convicted of child abuse and neglect, and she received a sentence of four years. The trial court ordered the appellant to serve her sentence in community corrections. Subsequently, the appellant's community corrections sentence was revoked, and the appellant was ordered to serve the balance of her sentence in confinement. On appeal, the appellant challenges the revocation of her community corrections sentence and the imposition of a term of confinement. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Blount | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
James Emmett Moses, Jr., v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, James Emmett Moses, Jr., pleaded guilty to aggravated burglary, two counts of robbery, and theft of property under $500, for which he received an effective 26-year incarcerative sentence. On direct appeal, the petitioner unsuccessfully challenged his sentences as excessive. See |
Hardeman | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
James Dubose v. Tony Parker, Warden
The Defendant, James DuBose, appeals the denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The Defendant, serving a sentence of life in prison for first degree murder, raises four issues on appeal: 1) that the claims raised in his petition for habeas corpus relief were not previously adjudicated; 2) that his judgment of conviction is void because his indictment failed to allege an offense; 3) that his judgment of conviction is void because it is based on an unconstitutional statute; and 4) that the trial court erred in failing to appoint counsel for his habeas corpus proceedings. Finding the denial of the Defendant’s petition was appropriate, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Lake | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Shannon Smith v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, Shannon Smith, pled guilty to domestic assault, and he was sentenced to eleven months and twenty-nine days. Subsequently, the Petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief, alleging that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. After a hearing, the post-conviction court dismissed the petition, and the Petitioner now appeals. Finding that there exists no reversible error, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Rutherford | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Jerome Bond
The defendant, Jerome Bond, was convicted of felony murder and especially aggravated robbery. See Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 39-13-202, -403. The trial court imposed a life sentence for the felony murder and a sentence of twenty-five years for the especially aggravated robbery and ordered the sentences to be served consecutively. In this appeal, the defendant asserts that the trial court erred by (1) admitting into evidence a photograph of him taken by police; (2) denying his motion to modify Tennessee Pattern Jury Instruction 43.04; (3) denying his request to instruct the jury on the lesser included offenses of especially aggravated robbery; and (4) ordering his sentences to be served consecutively. The judgments of the trial court are affirmed. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Byas Wofford, IV v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Byas Wofford, IV, stands convicted of five counts of identity theft, one count of forgery in an amount over $1,000, and one count of forgery. Pursuant to his plea agreement, the petitioner pleaded guilty to these seven offenses and received an effective 12-year sentence to be |
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Jackie F. Curry v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Jackie F. Curry, appeals the Knox County Criminal Court's summary dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. He claims the trial court erred in finding his petition barred by the Post-Conviction Procedure Act's one-year statute of limitations. He asserts that Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004), announced a new rule of constitutional law requiring retroactive application. We affirm the trial court's summary dismissal of the petition. |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Stephanie Ann Mays
The State appeals the suppression of evidence by the Obion County Circuit Court. The Defendant, Stephanie Ann Mays, was arrested for criminal trespass, and a search of Mays’ person followed, which revealed the presence of a quantity of cocaine and marijuana. After an evidentiary hearing, the trial court granted Mays’ motion to suppress and dismissed the charges. The State argues that because the police had probable cause to arrest Mays, the resulting search and seizure of the evidence was valid. After review, we conclude that Mays’ arrest for trespass, which was based upon an erroneously generated police document, was invalid as no probable cause existed to arrest. As such, the evidence was properly suppressed. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. |
Obion | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Alice Irene Thomas
A Weakley County Circuit Court jury convicted the appellant, Alice Irene Thomas, of making a false report, a class D felony. The trial court sentenced her as a Range II, multiple offender to six years. The appellant appeals, claiming that the evidence is insufficient to support the conviction. Upon review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Weakley | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Gustavo Chavez
This case is before us after remand by the Tennessee Supreme Court. The defendant, Gustavo Chavez, pled guilty to one count of aggravated sexual battery, a Class B felony. He was sentenced to ten years at 100% to be served in the Department of Corrections. On appeal, this Court originally affirmed the defendant’s conviction but modified his sentence to eight years due to our determination that the trial court improperly applied a statutory enhancement factor in violation of Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004). Subsequently, our supreme court held in State v. Gomez, 163 S.W.3d 632 (Tenn. 2005) that Tennessee’s sentencing scheme constitutes a non-mandatory scheme which does not violate the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial as interpreted by Blakely. Accordingly, our supreme court remanded this case for reconsideration in light of Gomez. Upon consideration of Gomez, we affirm the conviction and sentence as originally imposed by the trial court. |
Decatur | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. James C. McWhorter
The defendant, James C. McWhorter, was convicted of two counts of forgery, misdemeanor evading arrest, and felony reckless endangerment. The trial court imposed a four-year sentence for each of the forgery convictions, an eleven month and twenty-nine day sentence for the misdemeanor evading arrest conviction, and a four-year sentence for the felony reckless endangerment conviction. The sentences were ordered to be served concurrently, for a Range II, effective sentence of four years. In this appeal, the defendant asserts (1) that the trial court erred by denying the motion to suppress evidence obtained during a search of his residence; (2) that the trial court erred by denying the motion to suppress the defendant's statement to police; (3) that the trial court erred by denying the motion to sever the offenses; (4) that there was a fatal variance between the indictment and the proof at trial; (5) that Count 3 of the indictment did not charge an offense; (6) that the offenses alleged were legally impossible under the facts of the case; (7) that the evidence was insufficient to support the convictions for evading arrest and reckless endangerment; (8) that the trial court erred by referring to his statement as a "confession;" (9) that the trial court should have given a curative instruction during a co-defendant's testimony; (10) that the sentence is excessive; and (11) that the trial court erred by denying probation. The judgments of the trial court are affirmed. |
Montgomery | Court of Criminal Appeals |
