Cecil v. Crowson, Clerk
|
Supreme Court | ||
Travelers Indemnity Co. vs. Kenton Freeman, et al
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
In re: Estate of Lester Doyle and Estate of Edgar Doyle vs. William Hunt
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Woodrow Wilson vs. Sentence Information Services, et al
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Alvin Ray Taylor - Dissenting
I find that I must respectfully depart from Judge Hayes’s opinion. I concur in the reversal of the fine of $27,500, but I disagree that the fine provision of Code section 55-50–504(a) should be declared unconstitutional and that we should impose a fine pursuant to the provisions of Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-35-111(e)(1). I have concluded that we should hold that the particular fine in this case is excessive via our sentencing law but that we may, and should, stop short of declaring the statutory provision unconstitutional. On de novo review, we should impose a fine of $3,000, as is authorized by Code section 55-50-504(a). |
Coffee | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Alvin Ray Taylor
Alvin Ray Taylor was convicted by a jury of driving on a revoked license, second offense. The jury fixed his fine at $27,500. Taylor argues on appeal that the fine provisions of TENN. CODE ANN. § 55-50-504(a)(2) permit the imposition of a fine with no maximum limit violating the Eighth Amendment protection against excessive fines. After review, we find the penalty provisions of the statute, as it relates to the amount of fine which may be fixed, unconstitutional and the fine imposed in this case excessive. Accordingly, that portion of the judgment imposing a fine of $27,500 is vacated. The Appellant’s fine is modified to reflect a fine of $2,500 pursuant to TENN.CODE ANN. § 40-35-111 (e)(1) ( maximum authorized fine for class A misdemeanor). |
Coffee | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Marcus W. Keener
The defendant was indicted for first degree murder and convicted by a Lawrence County jury of second degree murder. In this appeal as of right, the defendant presents two issues for our review: (1) whether the evidence was sufficient to support his conviction; and (2) whether the trial court erred in failing to charge the jury on the lesser-included offenses of criminally negligent homicide and reckless homicide. The trial court charged the jury as to first degree murder, second degree murder, and voluntary manslaughter. The defendant received a sentence of twenty years to be served at 100% in the Tennessee Department of Correction. Having reviewed the entire record, we conclude that the evidence was sufficient to convict the defendant of second degree murder. We further conclude that the trial court did not err in failing to instruct on two additional lesser-included offenses. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. |
Lawrence | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Marcus W. Keener - Concurring
While I concur in the result, I write separately because I believe that the trial court erred by failing to instruct the jury on the lesser included offenses of criminally negligent homicide and reckless homicide. |
Lawrence | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Danyelle Dewain Parker
The defendant was convicted by a Davidson County Criminal Court jury of aggravated burglary, aggravated assault, and kidnapping, for which he received an effective sentence of eighteen years. In this appeal as of right, he raises the following issues: 1) whether the trial court erred in allowing the victim's son to testify about the defendant's prior assault on the victim; 2) whether the convictions for aggravated assault and kidnapping should have been merged; and 3) whether the trial court erred in imposing consecutive sentencing. Based upon our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Billy Crowe, et al vs. Maury County, et al
|
Maury | Court of Appeals | |
Eric Young v. Dept. of Corrections
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
John David Terry vs. State
|
Davidson | Supreme Court | |
John David Terry vs. State
|
Davidson | Supreme Court | |
Charlotte Brown, et al vs. Birman Managed Care, Inc., et al
|
Putnam | Supreme Court | |
Robert Spurlock, et al vs. Sumner County, et al
|
Sumner | Supreme Court | |
Robert Wilson, Jr. vs. Martha Wilson
|
Blount | Court of Appeals | |
Lydia Brewster vs. Dan Brewster
|
Stewart | Court of Appeals | |
Amy Blankenship vs. Carl Blankenship
|
Williamson | Court of Appeals | |
C.R. Batts Const. v. 101 Construction Co., et al.
|
Rutherford | Court of Appeals | |
Nina Noel vs. Harold Noel
|
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
|
Supreme Court | ||
State of Tennessee v. Doug Myers
Doug Myers was convicted by a Warren County Circuit Court jury of aggravated assault. The trial court sentenced Myers, as a Range I standard offender, to six years incarceration in the Department of Correction. On appeal, Myers raises the following issues for our review: (1) whether the evidence presented at trial was sufficient to support his aggravated assault conviction; (2) whether the trial court erred by allowing testimony concerning Myers' subsequent criminal conduct; and (3) whether the trial court erred in sentencing Myers to six years incarceration. After review, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. |
Warren | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. William Glenn Wiley
William Glenn Wiley was convicted by a Davidson County jury of felony murder and especially aggravated robbery. Wiley was sentenced to life without the possibility of parole for the murder conviction and sentenced to twenty-five years for the robbery conviction, with the sentences to run concurrently. On appeal, Wiley raises the following issues for our review: (1) whether the evidence at trial was sufficient to support the conviction for felony murder; (2) whether the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction for especially aggravated robbery; (3) whether the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's reliance on two aggravating factors when imposing a sentence of life without the possibility of parole; and (4) whether the trial court erred by not instructing the jury on the theory of self-defense. After review, we find no error and affirm the judgment. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Pyamid Computers vs. Ben Gasparro
|
Henderson | Court of Appeals | |
Darryl J. Ross v. State of Tennessee
The Defendant was convicted in two jury trials of six counts of aggravated robbery and one count of attempted aggravated robbery. He received an effective sentence of sixty years for these crimes. The Defendant subsequently pled guilty to three additional counts of aggravated robbery, one additional count of attempted aggravated robbery, and one count of theft. After an unsuccessful appeal of his second trial, the Defendant filed for post-conviction relief, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. After a hearing the post-conviction court denied relief, which ruling the Defendant now appeals. We affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals |