Holley vs. Haehl
M1999-02105-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Jim T. Hamilton
Landowner sued adjoining landowner and timber cutter in general sessions court for trespass and the cutting of timber on her land. From an adverse judgment, landowner appealed to the circuit court. After a trial de novo, the trial court held that adjoining landowner owned the land involved by adverse possession and entered judgment for defendants. Landowner has appealed.

Nancy Bloom vs. Douglas Bloom
W1998-00365-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Kay S. Robilio
This is a divorce case. The parties were married for eighteen years and had a fifteen year old son. The wife was granted the divorce. The wife was awarded, inter alia, the marital home and the equity in it, 60% of the value of various financial assets, her automobile, and various household furnishings. Custody of the parties' son was awarded to the wife, and the husband was granted supervised visitation. The husband was ordered to pay child support. The wife was awarded 60 months of rehabilitative alimony, with the rate of rehabilitative alimony to increase when the husband's child support obligation ends. The wife's request for attorney's fees was denied. The husband appeals the division of the marital property and the amount of rehabilitative alimony awarded. The wife appeals the denial of her request for attorney's fees. We affirm, finding that the preponderance of the evidence supports the trial court's division of the marital property, the award of alimony, and the denial of the wife's request for attorney's fees.

State vs. Retha Smith
W1999-00607-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Julian P. Guinn
The defendant appeals her jury conviction and sentence for possession of a Schedule II controlled substance with the intent to manufacture, sell or deliver. She received a sentence of three years with one year to be served in confinement and the remainder to be served on community corrections. The defendant raises the following issues for review: (1) whether the evidence is insufficient to sustain her conviction; (2) whether the prosecuting attorney made improper remarks during his closing argument; and (3) whether her sentence is excessive. Upon a review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court but remand for the assessment of the fine.

Edgar/Mary Mulrooney vs. Town of Collierville
W1999-01474-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Walter L. Evans
This appeal arises from a quo warranto action filed by the Mulrooneys ("Property Owners") on behalf of residents of subdivisions annexed by Collierville ("Town"). Property Owners claimed that Town did not meet the statutory requirements needed to annex the subdivisions. The jury returned a verdict on behalf of Town, finding that the annexation was proper. Thereafter, Property Owners filed a motion for new trial which was denied by the court. Property Owners appeal.

State vs. James Starnes
W1999-01854-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Julian P. Guinn
The petitioner appeals from a denial of post-conviction relief, claiming his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance. We conclude the record is insufficient for proper appellate review. Thus, we remand to the trial court for an additional hearing.

State vs. Donaven Brown
W1999-00629-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Joseph H. Walker, III
The defendant and the victim were both maximum security inmates at the Corrections Corporation of America facility in Clifton, Tennessee. After the victim, his hands and feet restrained, had been released from his cell to use a telephone, the defendant asked to be released from his cell take a shower. After his hands, but not his feet had been restrained, he pushed a correctional officer aside and ran from his cell, confronting the victim near the telephones. "Bad blood" had existed between the victim and the defendant, both of whom had armed themselves that day with shanks, or homemade prison knives. The victim received six knife stab wounds, two of which were potentially fatal. The defendant was then charged with first degree murder and felony possession of a weapon in a penal institution and, following his convictions of both offenses, sentenced to life without parole and three years, respectively, the sentences to be served concurrently. He timely appealed, presenting as issues whether the trial court erred in allowing proof that he had asserted his right to remain silent and requested an attorney and whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain the conviction for first degree murder. Based upon our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Marcus Askew
98-07544-45-46
Trial Court Judge: Joseph B. Dailey

State vs. Matthew Leonard & Bernie Evans
E1999-02724-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Lynn W. Brown
The appellants, Matthew W. Leonard and Bernie J. Evans, each pled guilty in the Criminal Court for Washington County to three counts of kidnapping, a class C felony, three counts of aggravated assault, a class C felony, one count of escape, a class E felony, and one count of theft over $10,000, a class C felony. The appellants requested that the trial court grant them full probation. After a probation hearing, the trial court denied the appellants' request. The appellants present the following issue for our review: whether the trial court erred in denying the appellants full probation. After a review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Smith v. Safety Kleen Corporation
E1999-01123-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Byers, Sr. J.
Trial Court Judge: Howell N. Peoples, 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, Everett Alan Smith, filed various motions in this case, all of which were denied by the trial court. The plaintiff appeals from the trial court's: (1) refusal to award temporary total benefits from the date of injury until time of medical improvement rating by physician or from the date of injury until trial; (2) denial of a lump sum payment of attorney fees because the request was in the form of a motion rather than in the form of a petition; (3) denial of motion requiring the defendant to pay for medication and authorized physician benefits because the plaintiff sought these by motion rather than by petition. The plaintiff also raises the issue of whether the trial court erred in refusing to pay certain pharmacy charges. We affirm the judgment of the trial court in part, reverse the judgment in part, and remand the case to the trial court for further proceedings.

Steven Porreca v. Chili's Inc., & Liberty Mutual
E1999-00961-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: John K. Byers, Sr. J.
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Howell N. Peoples, Chancellor
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tennessee Code Annotated _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The plaintiff was burned while working for the defendant restaurant. The defendant did not dispute that the plaintiff suffered a compensable injury but did argue the award of fifty percent permanent partial disability was excessive and also contended the trial court should have allowed an offset for overpayment of approximately two weeks of temporary total disability. We affirm.

State vs. Edward Mitchell
W1999-01314-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Carolyn Wade Blackett
The defendant, Edward Mitchell, appeals as of right from his conviction by a jury in the Shelby County Criminal Court for two counts of aggravated assault, a Class C felony. His sole issue on appeal is whether the trial court erred by denying him a continuance because of the unavailability of a witness. After a review of the record, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand for a new trial.

State vs. John Palmer
W1999-01310-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Dick Jerman, Jr.
Defendant, John David Palmer, was convicted of voluntary manslaughter and especially aggravated robbery following a jury trial in Gibson County Circuit Court. He was sentenced to serve three years for voluntary manslaughter and twenty years for especially aggravated robbery with the sentences to be served concurrent with each other. He does not appeal the voluntary manslaughter conviction or sentence. However, regarding the conviction for especially aggravated robbery, Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support the conviction and argues that the trial court committed reversible error by not instructing the jury on the lesser-included offense of theft and unauthorized use of a vehicle, i.e., joyriding. After review, we reverse and remand for a new trial on the offense of especially aggravated robbery.

Michael Alger vs. Corrections Corp.
W2000-00500-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Jon Kerry Blackwood
An inmate sued Corrections Corporation of America and various individuals alleging failure to provide dental and medical care. The trial court dismissed the complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The judgment of the trial court is reversed in part and affirmed in part.

State vs. Henry Marshall Jr.
W1999-01159-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Roy B. Morgan, Jr.
Defendant Henry Marshall, Jr. was convicted of reckless aggravated assault following a jury trial in the Madison County Circuit Court. After a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced Defendant as a Range I Standard Offender to a term of two years, with the Defendant to serve eleven months and twenty-nine days in the local jail, and the remaining one year and one day on supervised probation. The Defendant challenges his conviction and his sentence, raising the following issues: (1) whether the trial court erred in denying Defendant's request for an instruction on self-defense, (2) whether the trial court erred in denying Defendant's request for an instruction on the lesser-included offense of simple assault and (3) whether the trial court correctly sentenced the defendant. After a review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court as modified herein.

State vs. Ronnie Bradfield
W1999-02344-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: James C. Beasley, Jr.
Petitioner, Ronnie Bradfield, was convicted by a jury in the Shelby County Criminal Court of three counts of attempt to commit second degree murder, which this Court affirmed on direct appeal. Petitioner subsequently filed a pro se petition together with an amended and supplemental petition for post-conviction relief alleging, primarily, ineffective assistance of counsel. The post-conviction judge denied relief following an evidentiary hearing which took place over numerous days. Petitioner now appeals the judgment of the post-conviction court denying his petition. We affirm.

State vs. Willie Boyland
W1999-00634-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Jon K. Blackwood
Following a jury trial in the Hardeman County Circuit Court, Defendant was convicted of the offense of casual exchange of marijuana. On appeal, Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the conviction. He also asserts that the trial court erred by prohibiting Defendant from questioning a state witness about a civil warrant and judgment against the witness and that the trial court erred by overruling his objection to the State eliciting testimony from its primary witness regarding the witness' employment. We have reviewed the record on appeal and the briefs of the parties and find no reversible error. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

State vs. James M. Loveday
E1999-02072-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Richard R. Vance
Following a jury trial, Defendant, James M. Loveday, was convicted of one count of attempted first degree murder, four counts of aggravated assault, and two counts of reckless endangerment. The trial court sentenced him to twenty-five (25) years for the attempted first degree murder conviction, six (6) years for each of the four aggravated assault convictions, and two (2) years for each of the reckless endangerment convictions. The sentences were ordered to be served consecutively to each other for a total sentence of fifty-three (53) years. On appeal, he challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the convictions of attempted first degree murder and aggravated assault, and argues that the trial court erroneously admitted testimony of prior bad acts, improperly considered victim impact letters in the presentence report, and argues that the sentences are excessive and that the trial court erred by ordering consecutive sentencing. After a review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court as modified herein.

State vs. Joshua Dailey
E1999-01342-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.
The Defendant, Joshua Dailey, pled guilty to two counts of the Class E felony offense of violation of the Habitual Motor Vehicle Offender Act. The trial court sentenced Defendant to two years for each conviction, to be served consecutively. Furthermore, the trial court ordered the first sentence to be served in split confinement, with 300 days incarceration in the county jail followed by placement in Community Corrections. The Defendant appeals, challenging the length of the total effective sentence and arguing that he should serve the entire sentence in Community Corrections. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Johnny L. Frye v. Athens Products
03S01-9904-CV-00043
Authoring Judge: John K. Byers, Senior Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. John B. Hagler
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tennessee Code Annotated _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. Review of the findings of fact made by the trial court is de novo upon the record of the trial court, accompanied by a presumption of the correctness of the finding, unless the preponderance of the evidence is otherwise. TENN. CODE ANN. _ 5-6-225(e)(2); Stone v. City of McMinnville, 896 S.W.2d 548, 55 (Tenn. 1995). The application of this standard requires this Court to weigh in more depth the factual findings and conclusions of the trial courts in workers' compensation cases. See Corcoran v. Foster Auto GMC, Inc., 746 S.W.2d 452, 456 (Tenn. 1988). The plaintiff appeals from the trial court finding that he had failed to show by a preponderance of the evidence that he had sustained an injury arising out of and in the course of his work. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. There is little need to go into significant detail concerning the facts in this case. There are significant discrepancies between the testimony of the plaintiff at trial and in the statements he made to medical providers concerning whether he sustained an injury on June 1, 1998, or whether he experienced pain on the prior Sunday while walking in the mall, or whether he sustained an injury at work on June 2nd. The plaintiff gave the only evidence concerning an alleged accidental injury. The determination of the trial judge was, by necessity, based upon his assessment of the evidence and his ruling based upon the testimony of the plaintiff. The trial court found that the plaintiff did not tell the defendant of any work- related accident until June 28th but found that he did notify the physician and especially the nurse practitioner on June 2nd that he sustained a work-related injury on June 1. The court found this unusual and ruled that the two histories cancelled out each other, thus causing the plaintiff to fail in carrying his burden of proof. 2

Clementine Newman vs. Allstate Insurance Co.
W1999-02064-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Robert L. Childers
Automobile owner sued body shop and her insurance company for alleged faulty repairs to vehicle after it was involved in a collision. The body shop repaired what the insurance company authorized, but owner initially claimed other damages which the insurance company and body shop determined were not a result of the collision. During attempts to resolve the dispute, body shop was willing to repair anything authorized by the insurance company, but requested the owner to pay the deductible and retrieve her automobile from their facility. Owner refused to take the automobile, and the body shop, after notification to her, started charging storage charges. In the suit that was initially tried in general sessions court, then de novo in the circuit court, owner sought to recover storage charges paid an additional award for other damage to her vehicle and for relief under the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act. The trial court awarded owner a judgment against the insurance company for additional damages and denied her claims under the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act and for repayment of the storage charges. Owner has appealed.

State vs. Darron Lenon
W1999-01951-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Dick Jerman, Jr.
In this case the Defendant, Darron Lenon, was found guilty of unlawful delivery of a Schedule II controlled substance, a Class B felony, following a jury trial. The trial court imposed a maximum Range I sentence of twelve years. In this appeal, the Defendant, in three issues, argues that the trial court erroneously applied an enhancement factor; failed to apply a mitigating factor; and failed to follow the mandates of the Tennessee Criminal Sentencing Reform Act of 1989. The Defendant asks this court to reverse the trial court and impose the minimum sentence of eight years. We decline to do so, and therefore affirm the judgment of the trial court.

James Karls vs. Percy Pitzer, et al
W1999-01107-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Jon Kerry Blackwood
This is an appeal from the trial court's order dismissing a petition for writ of habeas corpus for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. We affirm the ruling of the trial court.

State vs. Jenniefer Oakley
W1999-00850-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Bernie Weinman
Jennifer E. Oakley entered guilty pleas to three counts of misdemeanor possession of a controlled substance and one count of possession of drug paraphernalia. The manner of service, including the request for judicial diversion, was submitted to the trial court. The trial court denied a grant of judicial diversion based upon the circumstances of the offenses and the inherent dangerous effect of drugs to our communities. After review, we conclude that the record supports the trial court's denial of diversion. The judgment, accordingly, is affirmed.

State vs. Michael Upshaw
W1999-00777-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Gary R Wade
Trial Court Judge: James C. Beasley, Jr.

State vs. Billy Thompson
W1999-01001-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: James C. Beasley, Jr.
In 1995, Billy Thompson, a Mississippi resident, was convicted in Shelby County of driving under the influence, resulting in suspension of his driving privileges in this state for one year. Fifteen months later, Thompson was again charged and convicted of driving under the influence, sixth offense, reckless driving and driving while revoked, being the instant offenses before this court. On the date of the latter offenses, Thompson possessed a valid Mississippi driver's license, however, he had not complied with the statutory requirements for reinstatement of his driving privileges in this state. Thompson appeals his convictions contending the trial court erred (1) by failing to sever the charge of driving while license revoked from the remaining counts and (2) by failing to grant his motion for judgment of acquittal as to the charge of driving while license revoked. We conclude that all charges were properly joined pursuant to Tenn. R. Crim. P. 8(a). Moreover, we hold that a nonresident motorist, although possessing a valid out-of-state license, may not operate a motor vehicle in this state following this state's revocation of his driving privileges until the motorist complies with Tennessee's reinstatement procedures. Because we find the proof sufficient to support the challenged conviction, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.