State of Tennessee v. William Garrett
The appellant was convicted by a jury in the Shelby County Criminal Court of aggravated assault. The trial court imposed a sentence of thirteen years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the appellant contends that the evidence is not sufficient to support his conviction. After review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Dennis V. Morgan
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Dennis Morgan - Dissenting
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Darryl Lee Elkins
Defendant, Darryl Lee Elkins, was convicted by a Sullivan County jury of child rape, a Class A felony, and attempted child rape, a Class B felony. Defendant received consecutive sentences of twenty-five years for the Class A felony, and twelve years for the Class B felony. On appeal, Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the convictions, arguing that his convictions should be reversed because the “jury improperly accredited the victim’s testimony who committed perjury at trial.” After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgments. |
Sullivan | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Darryl Lee Elkins - Concurring and Dissenting
I concur in the majority opinion regarding the child rape conviction. I respectfully disagree regarding the attempted rape conviction. I believe the evidence is insufficient to convict the defendant of any offense above a Class B misdemeanor assault. |
Sullivan | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Latasha Whittington-Barrett vs. Jerry Hayes
|
Johnson | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Timothy Scott Barnes, David Grooms, and Richard Grooms
The defendants, Timothy Scott Barnes, David Grooms, and Richard Grooms, were convicted of attempted burglary, a Class E felony. The trial court imposed Range I sentences as follows: Timothy Scott Barnes, one year, three months; David Grooms, one year, six months; and Richard Grooms, one year, six months. In this appeal of right, the defendants challenge the sufficiency of the evidence. The judgments are affirmed. |
Cocke | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Christopher Tyce Hamblin
The defendant pled guilty to aggravated assault and was sentenced as a multiple Range II offender. He appeals his sentence of nine years and requests an alternative sentence of probation or community corrections. Based upon our review, we conclude that the trial court misapplied enhancement factor (11) and failed to consider two relevant mitigating factors. Furthermore, the trial court did not make findings as to how the enhancement factors were weighed to determine the appropriate sentence. We conclude, however, that the trial court's sentence of nine (9) years is appropriate based upon the defendant's lengthy history of criminal behavior. Furthermore, the defendant is not entitled to an alternative sentence because the length of his sentence exceeds eight years. |
Campbell | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Charles T. Sebree - Order
|
Montgomery | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Minnie Long v. HCA Health Svcs dba Southern Hills Medical Center
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Brian Leiderman
The defendant was convicted in January 2001 of aggravated assault and sentenced to four years in community corrections. Subsequently, while confined in the Grundy County Jail, he was charged with assaulting another inmate, which generated a probation revocation warrant. Following a hearing, the court revoked the community corrections sentence and ordered that he serve the sentence imposed for his aggravated assault conviction. He appealed the revocation, arguing that the evidence was insufficient to justify it and that his due process rights were violated because the trial court did not provide in its revocation order a written statement as to the evidence relied upon. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Grundy | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Charles Kendall Duty, et al v. Farah Dabit, et al
|
Sumner | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. James Bradley Warner
|
Bedford | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Anthony L. Rogers
The defendant, Anthony L. Rogers, was indicted for attempted second degree murder and two counts of aggravated assault. He pled guilty to one count of aggravated assault, a Class C felony, and the remaining counts were dismissed. The trial court sentenced the defendant as a Range II, multiple offender to eight years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. As his sole issue on appeal, he argues that the trial court erred in ordering his sentence to be served consecutively to a federal sentence. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Coffee | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Ralph Richards v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co.
|
Coffee | Supreme Court | |
Clement Bernard, M.D. v. Sumner Regional Health Systems
|
Sumner | Court of Appeals | |
Robert Davis, et al v. Wilson County
|
Wilson | Supreme Court | |
E2001-01963-COA-R3-JV
|
Hamilton | Court of Appeals | |
T.H. Engineering & Mfg. & Ron Tourte vs. Chris Mussard
|
Knox | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Thomas Dee Huskey - Dissenting
As acknowledged by the majority in its carefully considered opinion, trial judges are vested with broad discretionary powers in the conduct of a trial. Courts must monitor all attorney conduct and may direct a remedy if the performance impedes the orderly administration of justice. United States v. Dinitz, 538 F. 2d 1214, 1219 (5th Cir. 1976). That authority necessarily includes the supervision of appointed counsel for indigent defendants. Moncier v. Ferrell, 990 S.W.2d 710 |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Jerry B. Graves
The defendant was convicted of felony murder and especially aggravated robbery and sentenced to concurrent punishment of life imprisonment and twenty-three years, respectively. In his appeal, he argues that the trial court erred in not remanding the matter for another preliminary hearing after it was discovered that the first hearing had not been recorded; in limiting his cross-examination of two prosecution witnesses as to pending matters; and in admitting an autopsy photograph of the victim's head, with the scalp pulled back, to show the gravity of his wound. Based upon our review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Thomas Dee Huskey
The defendant, Thomas Dee Huskey, brings this extraordinary appeal in which he challenges the order of the Knox County Criminal Court removing his lead counsel of record for his retrial on four counts of first degree murder. The defendant asserts that the trial court’s action is an infringement on his Sixth Amendment right to counsel. We conclude that the trial court’s order violated the defendant’s right to counsel and exceeded its discretion. We vacate the trial court’s order and remand the case for further proceedings. |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Flynt Engineering Company vs. William Cox
|
Sevier | Court of Appeals | |
Jeffery A. Wright v. Johnston Coca-Cola & Dr. Pepper
|
Knox | Workers Compensation Panel | |
Jeffery A. Wright v. Johnston Coca-Cola & Dr. Pepper
|
Knox | Workers Compensation Panel |