State vs. Anthony Merlo
|
Bedford | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Landy Kash
|
Smith | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Timothy Dean Martin
|
Lincoln | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Michael Harvey
|
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Campbell
|
Carter | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Fredrick Butler
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Edward Huddleston
|
Gibson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Fred Arthur Stier
|
Henry | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Christopher Gibbs
|
Cheatham | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Franko Fykes vs. State
|
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. John Hackney
|
Rutherford | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Mattie Davis aka Mattie Hill
|
Marshall | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Ronnie Holmes
|
Chester | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Henry Baker
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Bill Dixon
|
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
James A. Uhles v. State of Tennessee
|
Wayne | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
03C01-9705-CR-00186
|
Morgan | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
03C01-9612-CR-00483
|
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
03C01-9702-CR-00071
|
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Doyle Hart
|
Lake | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Franklin Harris
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Cleotha Nash
|
Lauderdale | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. LaKeith Lightfoot
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Gary Dotson vs. State of Tennessee
The petitioner was convicted of first-degree murder and employing a firearm during the commission of a felony. These convictions were affirmed on direct appeal. State v. Gary Thomas Dotson, No. 89-262-III, Sumner County (Tenn. Crim. App. filed Aug. 3, 1990, at Nashville). He is serving a life sentence plus five years for these offenses. In December 1992, he filed for post-conviction relief alleging that his lawyers were ineffective at both his trial and on direct appeal. The court below denied relief, which he now appeals. He further alleges that the post-conviction court erred when it denied his motion for forensic and psychological evaluations. Upon our review of both the record below and the trial record, we affirm. |
Sumner | Court of Criminal Appeals |