State of Tennessee v. Thurman G. Ledford
Thurman G. Ledford appeals a certified question of law whether the strong odor of ammonia emanating from his residence supported probable cause for the issuance of a search warrant, which resulted in his arrest for drug-related activities. Because we conclude that the issue is not dispositive of the defendant's case, we dismiss his appeal. |
Hamblen | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Chattanooga-Hamilton County Hospital Authority vs. Ade Oni, M.D.
|
Hamilton | Court of Appeals | |
In Re: Estate of Donald Lee Keith
|
Bledsoe | Court of Appeals | |
Joseph Houston vs. Charles Mounger
|
Roane | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Bruce Hollars
The Overton County Criminal Court revoked the probation of the defendant, Bruce Hollars, and ordered his original sentences of two consecutive terms of eleven months and twenty-nine days be served in confinement. On appeal, the defendant contends that the trial court erred by requiring him to serve the entire sentence. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Overton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Glenn Basham v. Henry Tillaart
|
Grundy | Court of Appeals | |
Michael J. Bailey v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Michael J. Bailey, filed a petition for post-conviction relief alleging that he was denied effective assistance of counsel. Following an evidentiary hearing, the post-conviction court denied relief and the petitioner timely appealed. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Mario Antoine Leggs
The Defendant, Mario Antoine Leggs, was convicted by a jury of theft, robbery, two counts of reckless endangerment, aggravated robbery, two counts of evading arrest, three counts of reckless aggravated assault, leaving the scene of an accident, and driving on a suspended license. After a sentencing hearing, the trial court ordered the Defendant to serve an effective sentence of twenty-three years, eleven months, and twenty-eight days in the Department of Correction. In this direct appeal, the Defendant raises the following issues: (1) whether the trial court erred by denying the Defendant's motion to sever the offenses; (2) whether the trial court erred by admitting prior identification testimony; (3) whether the Defendant is entitled to a new trial based upon improper remarks made by the prosecutor during closing argument; (4) whether the trial court erred by not reducing the Defendant's three convictions for reckless aggravated assault to simple assault; (5) whether the trial court erred by not merging one of the Defendant's convictions for evading arrest with his conviction for leaving the scene of an accident; and (6) whether the trial court properly sentenced the Defendant. We hold that the trial court erred by not severing the offenses that occurred on November 16, 2000. However, we deem the error harmless. Because we find insufficient evidence to support the Defendant's second conviction for evading arrest, we reverse it and dismiss that charge. In all other respects, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Gwendolyn Jackson vs. Zodie Hamilton
|
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
State v. Maurice Nash
|
Tipton | Supreme Court | |
Thomas Bronson vs. Horace Umphries vs. Norfolk Railway
|
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
Frank Hooper Lacey v. Karla Suzanne Lacey
|
McNairy | Court of Appeals | |
Kathleen Earley vs. Robert Earley
|
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
W2002-01946-COA-R3-CV
|
Madison | Court of Appeals | |
John Wayne Goodman v. City of Savannah And Savannah
|
Hardin | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Sandra Ann Whaley, alias Sandy Ann Whaley
The appellant, Sandra Ann Whaley, was convicted by a jury in the Hamilton County Criminal Court of driving under the influence (DUI) and assault. The trial court imposed a total effective sentence of eleven months and twenty-nine days incarceration in the workhouse, to be suspended upon service of thirty days in confinement. On appeal, the appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting her DUI conviction and she also complains about the sentences imposed. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
In Re: Estate of Flora King vs. John B. Oakley
|
Sevier | Court of Appeals | |
Barbara Pritchett v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Larry
|
Knox | Workers Compensation Panel | |
Louis Federico v. Aladdin Industries
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Johnny Gant v. Suncom Wireless
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Paula Bowman v. State
|
Court of Appeals | ||
M2002-00812-COA-R3-CV
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
W2002-01532-COA-R3-CV
|
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
Gloria J. Guinn v. Lucious T. Guinn
|
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
Town of Oakland v. Town of Somerville,
|
Fayette | Court of Appeals |