State of Tennessee v. Brandon Ray Roland
Following a jury trial, Defendant, Brandon Ray Roland, was convicted of first degree premeditated murder, first degree felony murder and theft of property over $10,000. The trial court merged the felony murder conviction into the premeditated first degree murder conviction and sentenced Defendant to life imprisonment. After a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced Defendant to three years for the theft conviction and ordered the sentence to run concurrently with the life sentence. In his appeal, Defendant argues that (1) the evidence is insufficient to sustain his conviction for first degree murder; (2) the trial court erred in not granting a new trial because of improper juror conduct; (3) the trial court erred in not suppressing a letter written by Defendant while in juvenile detention; and (4) the Rhea County Juvenile Court erred in transferring Defendant to stand trial as an adult. Defendant does not appeal his conviction for theft. Following a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Rhea | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. John A. Turbyville
The appellant was convicted by a jury of the offense of reckless aggravated assault. He received a sentence of seven years incarceration as a Range II multiple offender convicted of a Class D felony. On appeal the appellant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict and that the trial court erred in denying him any form of alternative sentencing. Appellate review is available for these two issues despite the fact that the appellant failed to file a timely motion for new trial under Tenn. R. Crim. P. 33(b). However, review of these issues is dependent on either a timely filed notice of appeal, or in the interest of justice, a waiver of the timely filing of a notice appeal. Tenn. R. App. P. 4(a). Because the appellant filed a late motion for a new trial, his notice of appeal is likewise tardy. Neither has the appellant sought a waiver of the timely filing of the notice of appeal. Under these circumstances the appeal is DISMISSED. |
Sullivan | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Roy Malone vs. Scott Probasco
|
Hamilton | Court of Appeals | |
R. Scott Martin v. John Curtis King
|
Scott | Court of Appeals | |
Lynn Raiteri Ex Rel. Mary Cox v. NHC Healthcare
|
Knox | Court of Appeals | |
Conchita Johnson vs. Greg Johnson
|
Sevier | Court of Appeals | |
Clarence Matz, et ux vs. Wuest Diagnostics
|
Knox | Court of Appeals | |
Bobby Cunningham v. Terry Lester
|
Bedford | Court of Appeals | |
Angela Taylor vs. Douglas Fezell
|
Greene | Court of Appeals | |
J.S. Haren Company vs. Kelly Services
|
Knox | Court of Appeals | |
Judy Longmire vs Kroger
|
Knox | Court of Appeals | |
Steve Conklin vs. State
|
McMinn | Court of Appeals | |
Ronald W. Rice v. David Mills, Warden
The petitioner, Ronald W. Rice, filed in the Morgan County Criminal Court ("the habeas court") for habeas corpus relief, alleging that he received an illegal sentence for his conviction for an aggravated rape which occurred in 1983. The habeas court granted the petitioner relief. On appeal, the State contends that the habeas court erred in finding that the petitioner was entitled to relief. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we reverse the judgment of the Morgan County Criminal Court, reinstate the petitioner's aggravated rape conviction, and remand to the Williamson County Criminal Court ("the convicting court") for correction of the judgment of conviction. |
Morgan | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Shun D. Jones
The Appellant, Shun D. Jones, was convicted by a Shelby County jury of two counts of rape and was sentenced to twenty years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, he argues that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support the verdict. After review, we find no error and affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Angelina Gilley v. Express Check Advance,
|
Madison | Workers Compensation Panel | |
Tommy Carey v. Camden Castings
|
Benton | Workers Compensation Panel | |
Donna Taylor v. Doris Holt
|
Cocke | Court of Appeals | |
State vs. E.G.P.
|
Bradley | Court of Appeals | |
James Wilkerson vs. PFC Global
|
Blount | Court of Appeals | |
Donald Lacy v. Wesley Cox
|
Sevier | Court of Appeals | |
Doris Cannon vs. Peninsula Hospital
|
Knox | Court of Appeals | |
02825-COA-R3-CV
|
Hamilton | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Howard B. Higley
A Hamilton County jury convicted the Defendant of driving under the influence (DUI), second offense. The trial court sentenced the Defendant to the following: "11 months, 29 days suspended after 6 months day for day (11 months, 29 days suspended probation after the 6 months)." The trial court also revoked the Defendant's driver's license for two years, ordered the Defendant to pay a $610 fine, and ordered the Defendant to avoid alcohol throughout the probation period. In addition, the trial court imposed twenty days of community service to be completed within one year. The Defendant now appeals, arguing the following: 1) that the trial court erred by denying the Defendant's motion to suppress the results of a breathalyser test, 2) that the trial court erred by limiting the testimony of the Defendant's accident re-construction expert's testimony about the Tennessee Department of Transportation's statistics regarding traffic accidents that occurred at the intersection in question, and 3) that the trial court abused its discretion by sentencing the Defendant to a sentence in excess of the maximum sentence available by statute for a DUI second offense. Finding no reversible error as concerns the conviction, we affirm the conviction. We vacate the sentence and remand for entry of an amended judgment. |
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Barry Winfred Ritchie v. State of Tennessee
In a series of steps designed to challenge his 1981 convictions for armed robbery and aggravated rape, Petitioner, Barry Winfred Ritchie, filed various pro se motions including (1) a motion for post-conviction relief and/or writ of error coram nobis, (2) a motion for relief of judgment pursuant to Rule 60.02 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure, (3) a petition for common law writ of certiorari, and (4) a motion to quash the indictments and correct an illegal sentence. All pleadings are predicated on the same allegation that the Hamilton County Criminal Court lacked territorial jurisdiction to try and convict Petitioner of the charged offenses. Following a careful review of the record, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
E2003-00132-COA-R3-CV
|
Hawkins | Court of Appeals |