State of Tennessee v. William Henry Barney
01S01-9802-CR-00033
Authoring Judge: Justice Aldolpho A. Birch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Walter C. Kurtz

The defendant, William Henry Barney, was convicted of eleven counts of rape of a child and seven counts of aggravated sexual battery. He is currently serving a total effective sentence of eighty years. Upon the Court of Criminal Appeals’s affirmance of these judgments, the defendant filed an application for permission to appeal to this Court. We granted the application in order to determine whether the language of the indictment was  sufficient under State v. Hill, 954 S.W.2d 725 (Tenn. 1997), and to determine whether the multiple convictions for rape of a child and aggravated sexual battery violate the constitutional principles of due process or double jeopardy. We conclude that the indictment is sufficient under Hill. In addition, we conclude that, under the facts and circumstances of this case, multiple convictions for rape of a child and aggravated sexual battery are justified and do not violate the constitutional principles of due process or double jeopardy.

Robby McCurry v. Container Corp. of America, a Division of Jefferson Smurfit Corporation
03S01-9705-CH-00050
Authoring Judge: Per Curiam

The appellee, Robby McCurry, filed a second motion to rehear on December 28, 1998, petitioning this Court to reconsider our decision in the above styled case. The appellee filed this petition without first seeking permission from this Court as prescribed in Rule 39(f) of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure. Accordingly, the motion is not well taken.

State of Tennessee v. Kristina Schindler
03S01-9804-CR-00040
Authoring Judge: Justice Janice M. Holder
Trial Court Judge: Judge Mary Beth Leibowitz

We granted this appeal to address whether a trial court can consider prior grants of diversion or previously expunged offenses in determining a defendant's suitability for diversion. In the case now before us, the trial court denied the defendant's request for judicial diversion because the defendant had previously been placed on diversion on two different occasions. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's decision to deny the defendant's application for judicial diversion. Upon review, we hold that evidence of prior diversions may be considered in determining whether a defendant is a suitable candidate for diversion.

Robert James Watkins v. Inman Construction Corp.
02S01-9710-CH-00098
Authoring Judge: F. Lloyd Tatum, Special Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Neal Small, 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 to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The plaintiff, Robert James Watkins, injured his right ankle on February 2, 1995 in the course of his employment for Inman Construction Company. He was temporarily working in Oxford, Mississippi, but was employed to work in Memphis, Tennessee. After hearing the evidence, the trial judge found that the plaintiff sustained a permanent partial disability of thirty-five percent to the right leg. The court also found that the plaintiff had been paid temporary total disability benefits for the period prior to October 1, 1995. The trial judge also found that the plaintiff worked sporadically on a part-time basis for the defendant from October 3, 1995 until December 29, 1995 and that plaintiff was entitled to temporary partial disability benefits through that period. The court also found that the plaintiff suffered temporary total disability from the date of the injury until November 7, 1996, excluding the periodfor temporary partial disability, and that the plaintiff was entitled to recover additional temporary total compensation for the period from October 1, 1995 until November 7, 1996 except for the aforesaid period for which an award was made for temporary partial disability benefits. The court also directed the defendant to pay the medical expense incurred for treatment of plaintiff by Dr. T. E. Rizk in the sum of $85.. On this appeal, the defendant presents two issues: (1) Whether the trial court's award of temporary total disability benefits following the date of maximum medical improvement was error. (2) Whether the trial court erred in ordering the employer to pay for the medical treatment of Dr. T. E. Rizk. The defendant does not attack the portion of the judgment awarding compensation for 35 percent permanent partial disability to the leg. It is conceded that the plaintiff injured the Achilles tendon of his right ankle while working on a construction site for defendant on February 2, 1995. He was treated conservatively by Dr. Wayne Lamar until May 16, 1995 when Dr. Lamar performed surgery 2

State vs. Tiffany Betts
02C01-9709-CC-00337

State vs. Christopher Eacholes
02C01-9803-CR-00065

State vs. Tony Williams
02C01-9810-CC-00301

Scott vs. Scott
03A01-9708-CH-00305

Simmons vs. Simmons
03A01-9805-CV-00158

Slate vs. Hooper
03A01-9809-CH-00299
Trial Court Judge: Ben W. Hooper, II

Olympia Child vs. City Maryville
03A01-9804-CV-00136

Macklin vs. Macklin
03A01-9807-CV-00232

State vs. Donald Stephens
01C01-9711-CC-00551
Trial Court Judge: Henry Denmark Bell

State vs. Ricky Woodard
01C01-9802-CC-00056
Trial Court Judge: Donald P. Harris

State vs. Michael Clark
01C01-9802-CC-00087

State vs. Huskey
03C01-9811-CR-00410
Trial Court Judge: Richard R. Baumgartner

State vs. Lamb
03C01-9708-CC-00346

Chatt. Regional vs. T.U. Parks Const.
03A01-9712-CH-00524

Butler vs. Diversified Energy
03A01-9804-CV-00146

Estate of Mildred Verkstrom
03A01-9808-CH-00267

Estate of Mildred Verkstrom
03A01-9808-CH-00267

Goforth vs. Goforth
03A01-9807-GS-00237

Goley vs. Broyles
03A01-9809-CV-00293

Goley vs. Broyles
03A01-9809-CV-00293

Booze vs. Fairfield Communities
03A01-9803-CV-00095