State of Tennessee v. Teresa Kay Nolan
Following a jury trial, Defendant, Teresa Kay Nolan, was convicted of two counts of aggravated assault and one count of reckless endangerment with a deadly weapon, for which she received a total effective sentence of four years. On appeal, Defendant contends that: (1) the evidence is insufficient to support her convictions for aggravated assault; (2) the trial court committed plain error by failing to provide a jury instruction on self-defense; (3) the trial court abused its discretion by allowing the State to cross-examine Defendant regarding her prior conviction for attempted impersonation of a licensed professional; and (4) the trial court abused its discretion when it permitted the State to cross-examine her regarding her violation of bond conditions. Upon review, we affirm the conviction in count 2 but remand for entry of a corrected judgment, reflecting Defendant’s conviction for reckless endangerment with a deadly weapon and imposing a concurrent one-year sentence. We affirm the judgments of conviction in counts 1 and 3 in all respects. |
Maury | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Chelsea Louise Smith
Defendant, Chelsea Louise Smith, appeals her Dickson County Circuit Court convictions for aggravated child abuse and first-degree felony murder committed in the perpetration of aggravated child abuse, for which she received sentences of fifteen years and life, respectively. Defendant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support her convictions; that the trial court abused its discretion by excluding the proposed testimony of her expert in biomechanics; and that her constitutional right to present a defense was violated by the trial court’s exclusion of the proposed expert testimony. Following a thorough review, we affirm. |
Dickson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Nickalous Ladd A/K/A Nickalous Clark
The Defendant, Nickalous Ladd a/k/a Nickalous Clark, was convicted by a Shelby County Criminal Court jury of convicted felon in possession of a firearm, a Class C felony, and was sentenced by the trial court as a Range IV career offender to fifteen years at 60% in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The sole issue the Defendant raises on appeal is whether the evidence is sufficient to sustain his conviction. Based on our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Johnny Mack Powell
A Knox County jury convicted the Defendant, Johnny Mack Powell, of one count of |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Jacob Lee Carney v. State of Tennessee
Petitioner, Jacob Lee Carney, appeals the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief, arising from his guilty-pleaded convictions for first degree premeditated murder and attempted first degree premeditated murder, for which he received a life sentence. On appeal, Petitioner argues that the post-conviction court erred in finding that he received the effective assistance of trial counsel and that his guilty plea was voluntarily and knowingly entered. After review, we affirm. |
Montgomery | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Leigh Ann Champion Thweatt
The Defendant, Leigh Ann Champion Thweatt, appeals the Lewis County Circuit Court’s revocation of her probation, arguing that the trial court erred in revoking her probation in full rather than allowing her to address her substance abuse issues on probation, contending that full revocation did not serve the ends of justice for the public or the Defendant. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Lewis | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Jacob Franks v. State of Tennessee
The Defendant, Jacob Franks, was convicted by a Madison County Circuit Court jury of sexual exploitation of a minor involving fifty or more images, a Class C felony, and fifteen counts of sexual exploitation of a minor, a Class D felony. See T.C.A. § 39-17-1003(a), (d)(2025). The trial court imposed an effective six-year sentence, to be served at 100%. On appeal, the Defendant contends that the trial court erred by excluding evidence of the Defendant’s roommate’s notarized written statement after the roommate invoked his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination at the trial. We conclude that the trial court erred in excluding the evidence. We affirm the judgments in Counts 5, 6,7, 8, 9,10, 11, 13, 14, and 15. We reverse the judgments in Counts 1, 2, 3, 4, 12, and 16 and remand for a new trial on these counts. |
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Sean Kirk Wagner
An Anderson County jury convicted the Defendant, Sean Kirk Wagner, of sexual battery |
Anderson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Shannon Leigh Smith v. State of Tennessee
Petitioner, Shannon Leigh Smith, appeals the denial of her post-conviction petition arguing that the post-conviction court erred in denying her claim that trial counsel was ineffective in 1) failing to uncover evidence of a detective’s sexual relationship with a State’s witness and the same detective’s termination from the Tennessee Alcoholic Beverage Commission for misconduct; 2) failing to file a motion to suppress searches of Petitioner’s cell phone and Facebook account; 3) inadequately cross-examining the victim’s sister-in-law; 4) failing to put forth evidence to support self-defense; 5) failing to call defense witnesses including an expert on battered woman syndrome; 6) and withdrawing motions to disqualify the clerk’s office and the district attorney general’s office. She further argues that she is entitled to relief based on the cumulative effect of trial counsel’s alleged errors. Following our review of the entire record, the briefs and oral arguments of the parties, and the applicable law, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Union | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Gabriel Seth Box
A Henderson County jury convicted the Defendant, Gabriel Seth Box, of first degree premeditated murder, theft of a firearm, and two counts of tampering with evidence. The trial court imposed an effective sentence of life plus six years. On appeal, the Defendant raises two issues: (1) whether the trial court erred in denying his motion to continue the trial date so that he could present an expert witness; and (2) whether the trial court erred in imposing consecutive sentencing. Upon our review, we conclude that the Defendant’s motion to continue should have been granted, though the error was harmless in light of the expected testimony of the defense expert. We also conclude that the case should be remanded for reconsideration of consecutive sentencing under the factors outlined in State v. Wilkerson, 905 S.W.2d 933 (Tenn. 1995). Accordingly, we respectfully affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand the case for reconsideration of the issues related to consecutive sentencing. |
Henderson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Kyle Golden
The Defendant, Kyle Golden, entered a guiltyplea to one count of aggravated assaultand three counts of child abuse. The Shelby County Criminal Court accepted the Defendant’s guilty plea and, following a sentencing hearing, denied the Defendant’s request for judicial diversion and imposed an effective sentence of five years’ supervised probation. The Defendant appeals, arguing that the trial court erred by denying his request for judicial diversion. Discerning no error, we affirm. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Terrance B. Smith v. State of Tennessee
Petitioner, Terrance B. Smith, appeals from the post-conviction court’s denial of a motion to reopen his post-conviction proceeding. Because the notice of appeal in this case fails to satisfy the requirements for an application for permission to appeal pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-30-117(c), we lack jurisdiction to consider the appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. |
Tipton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
William Rolandus Keel v. Robert Adams, Warden
The Petitioner, William Rolandus Keel, pro se, was convicted of two counts of rape of a |
Hardeman | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Keith Andrew Baggett
The Defendant, Keith Andrew Baggett, appeals from the Madison County Circuit Court’s |
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Frank Delmar Raines, Jr. v. State of Tennessee
Frank Delmar Raines, Jr., the Petitioner, appeals from the Blount County Circuit Court’s |
Blount | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. William Lavell Nelson
Pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, the Defendant, William Lavell Nelson, pled guilty |
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Thomas Lymn
Defendant, Thomas Lymn, appeals his Moore County Circuit Court jury conviction of theft of property valued at $2,500 or more but less than $10,000, arguing that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction. Upon our review, we conclude that the evidence was sufficient and, therefore, affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Moore | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Jeffrey Roach v. State of Tennessee
Jeffrey Roach, Petitioner, pled guilty to unlawful possession of a weapon by a convicted |
Hamblen | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Jonathan Andrew Berretta
A Coffee County jury convicted the Defendant, Jonathan Andrew Berretta, of one count of vehicular homicide by intoxication and one count of vehicular homicide per se. The trial court merged those convictions and sentenced the Defendant to twelve years’ imprisonment. On appeal, the Defendant raises thirteen issues in three broad categories: challenges to the denial of his motion to suppress the seizure of his blood, trial issues, and a sentencing issue. Challenging the denial of his motion to suppress, he contends that the trial court erred by finding that(1) the affidavit supporting the Vanderbilt University Medical Center (“VUMC”) search warrant for his blood contained no false or reckless statements; (2)probable cause supported the search warrant and judicial subpoena; (3) the search warrant was not overbroad; (4) the search warrant and judicial subpoena established a sufficient nexus between VUMC and the evidence sought; (5) the VUMC blood draws were not the result of state action; and (6) an earlier warrantless EMS blood draw was supported by probable cause and exigent circumstances. Regarding his trial, the Defendant argues that the trial court erred by (7) admitting a life-in-being photograph of the victim; (8) finding that the VUMC specimen release form satisfied the business records exception to the rule against hearsay; (9) finding that chain of custody was established for the VUMC blood samples; (10) admitting the VUMC blood draw evidence in violation of the Confrontation Clause; (11) instructing the jury on vehicular homicide per se in a manner that created an unconstitutional presumption of guilt; and (12) allowing the cumulative effect of those errors to deprive him of a fair trial. Finally, the Defendant maintains that the trial court erred in (13) ordering his sentence to run consecutively to a sentence he had pending in Davidson County at the time of these offenses. Upon our review, we respectfully affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Coffee | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Sheppard Washington v. Christopher Brun, Warden
Petitioner, Sheppard Washington, appeals from the Hickman County Circuit Court’s dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The habeas corpus court found that Petitioner’s request for relief, which was based upon a claim that his sentence had expired, was premature. Upon review, we affirm the judgment of the habeas corpus court. |
Hickman | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Marty Lynn Judd
The Defendant, Marty Lynn Judd, appeals from his Warren County Circuit Court convictions of second degree murder and possession of a prohibited weapon, for which he received an effective sentence of twenty-six years’ incarceration. On appeal, the Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the convicting evidence. He also asserts that the trial court erred by overruling his objections to hearsay and to leading questioning during the State’s direct examination of a witness. Discerning no error, we affirm. |
Warren | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Christopher W. Gadsden v. State of Tennessee
Christopher W. Gadsden, Petitioner, sought post-conviction relief from his convictions for second-degree murder and theft, claiming that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because an attorney with the Office of the Public Defender of Metropolitan Nashville & Davidson County (herein “Public Defender’s Office”)previously represented the victim, thereby creating a conflict of interest that rendered trial counsel’s representation ineffective. Following a hearing, the post-conviction court denied relief. We affirm. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. John Ernest Rediker
This matter is before the Court upon application of the Defendant, John Ernest Rediker, for permission to pursue an interlocutory appeal. Tenn. R. App. P. 9. The State has filed a response in opposition. The Defendant seeks review of the trial court’s order denying his request for special jury instructions in this case. Upon full consideration, the application is denied for the reasons stated below. |
Hickman | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
David C. Sands v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, David C. Sands, appeals the summary dismissal of his petition for writ of error coram nobis by the Rutherford County Circuit Court, alleging newly discovered evidence exists that demonstrates his innocence. After a thorough review of the record and the applicable law, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Rutherford | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Courtney B. Mathews v. State of Tennessee
In 1996, a Montgomery County jury convicted the petitioner, Courtney B. Mathews, of four counts of felony murder and one count of especially aggravated robbery for which he received an effective sentence of life without parole plus twenty-five years in confinement. On June 24, 2025, the petitioner applied for a writ of habeas corpus, alleging “the indictment upon which his judgment is based is duplicitous and, therefore, void. ”The habeas corpus court summarily dismissed the application, concluding the petition failed to state a cognizable claim for relief. The petitioner appealed. Upon our review, we respectfully affirm the judgment of the habeas corpus court. |
Wayne | Court of Criminal Appeals |
