Ted Ray Brannan v. State of Tennessee
The defendant, Ted Ray Brannan, was found guilty by a Franklin County jury of aggravated burglary and theft of property. Accordingly, the trial court sentenced him to an effective sentence of twelve years, ten years as a Range III persistent offender for his aggravated burglary conviction to be served concurrently with his twelve year sentence as a career offender for his theft of property conviction. The defendant appealed his conviction to this Court, and we dismissed the appeal, finding that the appeal was not properly before this Court because the defendant had failed to file a timely motion for new trial or a timely notice of appeal. See State v. Ted Ray Brannan, No. 01C01-9704-CC-00148, 1998 WL 242453, at *1 (Tenn. Crim. App. at Nashville, May 15, 1998). The defendant then sought post-conviction relief, and the post-conviction court found that the defendant was deprived of a direct appeal because his counsel was ineffective in failing to file a motion for new trial or a notice of appeal. Accordingly, the post-conviction court granted the defendant a delayed appeal. However, the court found that the defendant's other allegations of error were meritless. The defendant is now before this Court on a delayed appeal challenging the post-conviction court's finding that his other post-conviction issues lacked merit. Although we find that the lower court should have dismissed the post-conviction petition when granting him a delayed appeal, in the interest of judicial economy, we will address the issues pertaining to the post-conviction petition as well as those in his direct appeal. Having found that all the issues in this appeal lack merit, the judgment of the circuit court is affirmed. |
Franklin | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Michael Watkins v. Greg Fitzgerald
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
James Williams v. Salvadore Valdez v. TAPCO Underwriters
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Extendicare International v. James Anderson, III
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Dan Evans v. Phillip Matlock
|
Maury | Court of Appeals | |
Carol Soloman v. Klebber Murrey
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
David Ralph Liles, et al. v. Rebecca Sue Mitchell, et al.
|
Wilson | Court of Appeals | |
Barry Bernstein v. Debra Bernstein
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Hilton Jeffries v. TDOC
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Willie J. Cowan, Jr.
The Defendant was convicted by a Shelby County jury of vehicular homicide by intoxication and reckless driving. He received an effective sentence of nine and a half years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The Defendant now appeals, arguing the following: (1) that insufficient evidence was presented at trial to convict him of the charged offenses and (2) that the trial court erred in sentencing the Defendant. Finding no error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Larry Brown
The Defendant, Larry Brown, was convicted by a Shelby County jury of theft of property with a value over $500.00 and evading arrest. After a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced him to six years for the theft charge and eleven months and twenty-nine days for evading arrest. The trial court ordered the sentences to be served consecutively. On appeal, the Defendant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support a finding of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. We affirm the Defendant's conviction for evading arrest and reverse and dismiss his conviction for theft of property. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Roy Gray vs. Nancy Gray
|
Knox | Court of Appeals | |
Christina Fortenberry vs. G.T.George
|
Knox | Court of Appeals | |
Christina Fortenberry vs. G.T.George
|
Knox | Court of Appeals | |
Christine Bilyeu vs. Bobby Bilyeu
|
Cumberland | Court of Appeals | |
Jan W. Gamble v. Alex Grady Gamble, Iii
|
Hamilton | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Roger Edward Edwards
Defendant appeals the trial court's denial of defendant's request to withdraw his guilty plea and motion for a new trial. On appeal, defendant has two assertions: (1) he received ineffective assistance of counsel and (2) the State committed a Brady violation. Concluding that defendant received effective assistance of counsel and did not demonstrate a Brady violation, we affirm the trial court's judgment. |
Claiborne | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Emily Lewis vs. Life Care Centers of America
|
Hamilton | Court of Appeals | |
Michael Couillard vs. Martha Couillard
|
Carter | Court of Appeals | |
Michael Couillard vs. Martha Couillard
|
Carter | Court of Appeals | |
State v. William R. Stevens
|
Davidson | Supreme Court | |
State v. William R. Stevens
|
Davidson | Supreme Court | |
Kathy Jean Berry v. Sara Lee Corporation d/b/a Jimmy
|
Dyer | Workers Compensation Panel | |
Elaine Wynn vs. Joseph Hames
|
Benton | Court of Appeals | |
In Re: Madelanie Redman, Ray & Martha Bowen v. Nathan Redman
|
Hawkins | Court of Appeals |