State vs. Johnny Jones W2000-01241-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Jon Kerry Blackwood
This appeal follows dismissal of the Appellant's petition for post-conviction relief. The Appellant, Jones, was convicted by a Fayette County jury of possession of cocaine (over 26 grams) with intent to sell and possession of marijuana. On direct appeal, his convictions and sentences were affirmed. The Appellant filed this post-conviction petition asserting the following errors: (1) the trial court erred in not granting the Appellant's motion to sever; (2) the trial court erred in sentencing the Appellant; and (3) deficient representation by defense counsel including failing to timely file a Rule 11 application to the supreme court from this court's decision. We find that Appellant's defense counsel was ineffective with respect to his failure to timely file a Rule 11 application. Accordingly, the Appellant is granted the right to seek a delayed appeal to the Tennessee Supreme Court. Denial of post-conviction relief is affirmed as to the remaining issues.
Fayette
Court of Criminal Appeals
State vs. Michael Upshaw W1999-00777-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Gary R Wade
Trial Court Judge: James C. Beasley, Jr.
Shelby
Court of Criminal Appeals
State vs. Jerry Elliott W1999-00361-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: John Franklin Murchison
The Defendant, Jerry Wayne Elliott, pled guilty to three counts of aggravated assault, reserving his right to appeal a certified question of law, pursuant to Tenn. R. Crim. P. 37(b)(2)(i). Defendant had filed a Motion to Suppress evidence obtained from an allegedly unconstitutional search and seizure of Defendant, which the trial court denied following an evidentiary hearing. The denial of this Motion to Suppress is the basis of the certified question of law. After review of the record and the briefs we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Henderson
Court of Criminal Appeals
State vs. Shannon Corley E2000-00382-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.
The defendant seeks full probation after pleading guilty to aggravated burglary and theft. She claims the trial court erred in requiring her to be incarcerated for ninety days of her four-year sentence. We affirm the sentence as imposed.
Blount
Court of Criminal Appeals
William Collins vs. State E1999-02759-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Gary R Wade
Trial Court Judge: Lynn W. Brown
Because the trial court properly treated a habeas corpus petition as one for post-conviction relief and because the statute of limitations barred any review of constitutional issues, the petition was properly dismissed.
Washington
Court of Criminal Appeals
E1999-02594-COA-R3-CV E1999-02594-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: William R. Brewer
Blount
Court of Appeals
State vs. Myra L. Smith E1999-02196-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Mary Beth Leibowitz
Myra L. Smith appeals the sentencing decision of the Knox County Criminal Court revoking her non-incarcerative sentence and ordering service of the sentence in the TDOC. In September 1998, Smith pled guilty to the class C felony of facilitating aggravated robbery and was placed under the supervision of the Knox County Community Alternative to Prison Program (CAPP). Four months later, a violation warrant issued. On appeal, Smith argues that the trial court acted arbitrarily in revoking her suspended sentence by failing to consider her extreme drug addiction, her history of mental illness, and her lack of intent to violate the conditions of probation. Finding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion, we affirm.
Knox
Court of Criminal Appeals
State vs. Joe C. Anderson a/k/a Uncle Tom E1999-02485-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: E. Eugene Eblen
Raising issues of sufficiency of the evidence and improper sentencing, Joe C. Anderson appeals from his conviction of second degree murder in the Loudon County Criminal Court. Because we discern no error requiring reversal, we affirm.
Loudon
Court of Criminal Appeals
E2000-00256-COA-R3-CV E2000-00256-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Wheeler A. Rosenbalm
Knox
Court of Appeals
Peter A. Smith v. Asplundh Tree Expert Co. E1999-01376-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: John K.Byers, Sr. J.
Trial Court Judge: Howell N. Peoples, Chancellor
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tennessee Code Annotated _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The defendant appeals from the judgment of the trial court which awarded the plaintiff temporary total benefits from May of 1992 until November 2, 1995, and found the plaintiff had sustained a forty percent permanent partial disability to the body as a whole. The plaintiff suffered a compensable injury, returned to work for the pre-injury employer, then left that position and obtained employment with another employer. We affirm the award of permanent partial disability, reverse the award of temporary total disability and remand the case to the trial court for a determination of the amount owed consistent with our findings.
Smith
Workers Compensation Panel
State vs. Sandra Cooper W2002-01036-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Roy B. Morgan, Jr.
Defendant, Sandra Hoyle Cooper, appeals the trial court's revocation of her community corrections sentence. Defendant received two community corrections sentences of eleven months and twenty-nine days each following two separate convictions for theft and for filing a false police report. While serving her community corrections sentences, Defendant was arrested for aggravated robbery. Following a revocation hearing, the trial court revoked her community corrections sentences and ordered the imposition of her original sentences. Defendant argues that the trial court improperly based its revocation on circumstantial evidence that she committed the offense for which she was arrested. After a careful review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Madison
Court of Criminal Appeals
State vs. Emit Keith Cody E2000-02188-CCA-RM-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Ben W. Hooper, II
The Defendant, Emit Keith Cody, was convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. He appealed, and we reversed his conviction and remanded the case for a new trial based on our conclusion that the trial court's failure to give a limiting instruction to the jury on the use of the State's main witness's prior inconsistent statement constituted plain error. See State v. Emit Keith Cody, No. E1999-00068-CCA-R3CD, 2000 WL 190227 (Tenn. Crim. App., Knoxville, Feb. 16, 2000). The State applied for permission to appeal to the supreme court, which granted permission for the purpose of remanding the case to this Court for reconsideration in light of the supreme court's recent decision in State v. Smith, 24 S.W.3d 274 (Tenn. 2000). After revisiting this issue, we remain of the opinion that the trial court committed plain error by failing to give a limiting instruction. Accordingly, the Defendant's conviction is reversed, and the case is remanded for a new trial.
Cocke
Court of Criminal Appeals
Eddie Copeland vs. James A. Bowlen, Warden E1999-01753-CCA-R3-CD
Trial Court Judge: Buddy D. Perry
The trial court dismissed the petitioner's pro se petition for habeas corpus relief. The petitioner alleges that various credits should reduce his sentence. The trial court determined that it lacked jurisdiction to address this issue or, in the alternative, that the sentence had not expired. We affirm the dismissal of the petition.
Bledsoe
Court of Criminal Appeals
State vs. Rosalind Marie Johnson & Donna Yvette McCoy E1999-02468-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Defendant, Rosalind Marie Johnson, appeals her convictions for facilitation of first degree felony murder and aggravated burglary, for which she received concurrent sentences of 15 years and 3 years, respectively. Defendant, Donna Yvette McCoy, appeals her convictions for first degree felony murder and aggravated burglary, for which she received concurrent sentences of life with the possibility of parole and 3 years, respectively. Both defendants raise the issue of sufficiency of the evidence to support their convictions. Defendant Johnson raises the following additional issues in her appeal: 1) whether the trial court erred in failing to sever the defendants' trials; 2) whether the trial court erred in failing to remove a juror for cause; and 3) whether the trial court erred in failing to suppress statements made by Johnson. We conclude that the issues raised by both defendants in this appeal are without merit. The judgments of the trial court are affirmed.
The Defendant, Shawn Dontay Beard, appeals as of right following his conviction in the Warren County Circuit Court. Defendant was convicted by a jury for sale of a Schedule II controlled substance, cocaine, in an amount of less than point five (0.5) grams within one thousand feet of school grounds. Defendant argues there was insufficient evidence regarding his identity to support his conviction. He further challenges the length of his sentence on the grounds that the State raised the felony classification of his offense pursuant to the Drug-Free School Zone Act but failed to provide the Defendant with notice of enhancement. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
The appellant, Stejana S. Holder, was convicted of one count of aggravated assault, one count of resisting arrest, and one count of disorderly conduct. The Davidson County Criminal Court imposed an effective sentence of three years to serve sixty days in the workhouse followed by two years probation. On appeal, the appellant alleges that the trial court erred by denying total probation. Upon review, we find no error and affirm the sentence of the Davidson County Criminal Court.
This is an appeal in a divorce case of the Trial Court’s denial of Wife’s Motion seeking postjudgment interest. The Judgment was satisfied three years and four months after it was entered. The Motion for post-judgment interest was filed three months after the Judgment was paid. The Trial Court denied post-judgment interest on two grounds. The first was the Trial Court’s finding of an accord and satisfaction resulting from Husband’s payment of the judgment without interest. The Trial Court also held it would be unconscionable and inequitable for Husband to pay post-judgment interest. The Trial Court then exercised its discretion to deny post-judgment interest. Wife argues that the Trial Court can not deny post judgment interest for equitable reasons, that Husband failed to prove an accord and satisfaction, and that the accord and satisfaction affirmative defense may not be raised for the first time during legal argument, cannot be established without proof, and is waived if not pleaded. We hold the Trial Court erred, reverse the Judgment of the Trial Court, and remand the case for further proceedings. To avoid the appearance of impropriety or lack of impartiality, the Trial Judge is to recuse himself from those further proceedings. Tenn. R. App. R. 3; Judgment of the Trial Court Reversed; Case Remanded
By this suit the Plaintiffs seek a declaration that they are entitled to four separate prescriptive easements across property owned by the Defendant. Prior to the commencement of trial the Defendant conceded that the Plaintiffs were entitled to one easement and the Plaintiffs conceded that they were not entitled to another one. The Trial Court found in favor of the Plaintiffs as to the remaining two easements, resulting in this appeal. We affirm.
Kenneth A. McBride appealed from an Order of the Chancellor confirming the Referee's Report that concluded McBride had offered no new evidence on the issue of reducing child support, which had been previously adjudicated. We affirm.
This appeal questions whether a forum selection clause is valid and enforceable against the Plaintiffs, Larry Wells and Signal Capital Corporation. Pursuant to the forum selection clause, Signal One LLC and NationsBanc Capital Corporation filed a motion to dismiss for improper venue. The Trial Court granted the motion to dismiss by finding the forum selection clause was valid. We affirm.
Hamilton
Court of Appeals
Valerie A. Lewis v. Saturn Corporation M1999-00422-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Weatherford, Sr. J.
Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr., Chancellor
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. _5-6-225 (e) (3) for hearing and reporting of findings of fact and conclusions of law. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e) (1999) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Chancery Court Affirmed WEATHERFORD, SR. J., in which BIRCH, J., and GAYDEN, SP. J., joined. Thomas H. Peebles, IV and K. Suzanne Crenshaw, Columbia, Tennessee, for the appellant, Saturn Corporation. Lloyd T. Kelso, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Valerie A. Lewis. MEMORANDUM OPINION The trial court found that employee, Valerie A. Lewis, suffered a compensable injury which arose out of the course and scope of her employment with employer, Saturn Corporation. The trial court awarded employee twenty percent (2%) permanent partial disability to the body as a whole, in addition to all medical expenses, and future medical expenses, and temporary total disability benefits. The trial court held the employerwas entitled to a set-off of $9,762.93 for disabilitypayments in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. _5-6-114 (b). The trial court also granted employee discretionary costs in the amount of $2,846.5. The employer, Saturn Corporation, raises on appeal two issues: (1) The trial court erred in finding that employee's back injury arose out of the course and scope of employee's employment, and (2) The trial court erred in finding that employee sustained her burden of proof as to the causation of her back injury. The employee raises on appeal two issues (1) the trial court erred in holding that employer was entitled to a set-off of $9,762.93, and (2) the trial court erred in awarding employee two (2) times her medical impairment instead of awarding two and one-half (2 _) times her medical impairment. Appellate review is de novo upon the record of the trial court, accompanied bya presumption of correctness of the findings, unless the preponderance of evidence is otherwise. Tenn. Code Ann. _5-6-225 (e)(2). As discussed below, the panel has concluded that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed. Employee was forty-two (42) years old at the time of trial. She left high school in the 12th year prior to graduation. She attended Ross Medical Education Center and obtained a certificate as a medical-dental administrator. Employee was employed as a medical insurance biller for various hospitals and worked for Buick Motor Co. and Fisher Body prior to being employed at Saturn Corporation. Employee began working for Saturn Corporation on January 16, 1992. Employee did a variety of jobs at Saturn, and in 1995 she was assigned to the "lost foam team" where she met fellow employee, Deborah Leach, who was a member of the same team. Employee and Ms. Leach did not get along well. Ms. Leach complained about employee coming in late, being out on medical, sleeping on the job and having bad work ethics. On October 8, 1996, employee had a blowout on her way to work and was informed that her tire had been slashed in a way that would cause air to leak out slowly. She thought that Ms. Leach had something to do with this, and she and Ms. Leach had a conversation about the tire. Later on the same day, employee was standing near a table talking to Melvin Brantley, a co-worker, when Deborah Leach, carrying supplies, approached the employee and shoved her with her shoulder. Employee fell back on a table, rolled off the table and landed in a chair. Employee did not feel any pain initially. She first felt pain approximately two hours later when she was at home while trying to use the bathroom. Employee was out of work on vacation until October 16, 1996. When employee returned to work on October 16, 1996, she went to Initial Care Facility because of pain in her back, and from there she was sent to Dr. Bartsokas. Employee informed Dr. Bartsokas that she had been pushed causing her to twist through her trunk and low back area and developed low back pain. She further revealed that she had experienced back pain previously, apparentlytwo months prior to this incident and had undergone on MRI scan which was entirely normal. -2-
This appeal arises from an action for ejectment filed by Plaintiff John W. Johnson ("Plaintiff") against Defendant Bernice Wade ("Defendant"). Plaintiff filed suit in the Gibson County Circuit Court alleging that he was the sole owner of the tract of land where both Plaintiff's and Defendant's residences are located. Prior to Defendant's filing on an answer, Plaintiff filed a motion for default judgment. Thereafter, Defendant filed an answer, a motion to dismiss, and a motion to compel Plaintiff to appear for deposition. Following Plaintiff's failure to appear for deposition, failure to prepare an order as directed by the court, and an attempt to file a premature appeal, the trial court dismissed Plaintiff's case for failure to properly prosecute. Plaintiff appeals.
Gibson
Court of Appeals
The Kroger Company, et al. v. Sara Cooper M1999-01120-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Loser, Sp. J.
Trial Court Judge: Walter C. Kurtz, Judge
The employer has appealed contending the trial court's award of permanent partial disability benefits based on thirty-five percent to the leg for a torn meniscus is excessive.
Defendant was convicted by a jury of four counts of aggravated sexual battery and ten counts of rape of a child. In this direct appeal Defendant alleges he did not receive a fair trial because (1) the bill of particulars did not sufficiently inform Defendant of the charges, and (2) the prosecution violated Brady vs. Maryland when it failed to turn-over potentially exculpatory evidence to Defendant pre-trial. Held: the bill of particulars adequately appraised Defendant of the crimes with which he was charged. Although the prosecution violated Brady when it failed to turn over potentially exculpatory evidence to Defendant pre-trial, the error was harmless. Judgment of the trial court affirmed.
We granted this appeal to determine: 1) whether private school tuition constitutes an extraordinary educational expense under the Tennessee Child Support Guidelines; and 2) whether the noncustodial parent should be required to pay those expenses in addition to child support based upon the percentage of net income of the noncustodial parent. We hold that pursuant to the Tennessee Child Support Guidelines private school tuition is an "extraordinary educational expense." We affirm the decision of the Court of Appeals requiring the total amount of private school tuition to be paid by the obligor-father. We hold, however, that in appropriate cases a court may apportion the amount of tuition between the parties.
