State vs. Robert Wayman
E1999-02042-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: E. Eugene Eblen
The defendant pled guilty to reckless vehicular homicide, simple possession of marijuana, and sale of a Schedule VI controlled substance. The trial court sentenced the defendant to four years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction (DOC), and the defendant appeals from this sentence, requesting probation. We affirm the sentence of incarceration from the trial court.

State vs. John Clark Garrison
E1999-00121-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Lynn W. Brown
On August 3, 1992, the defendant pled guilty to two counts of theft under Tennessee Code Annotated sections 39-14-103, -105(4). The defendant was sentenced to two consecutive nine-year sentences and ordered to pay restitution in the amount of $51,000. On June 8, 1999, the defendant filed a Motion to Correct Illegal Sentence. It was denied. In this appeal, the defendant contends that 1) the trial court erred in its finding that the defendant's sentence of incarceration and restitution was legal as a matter of law; and 2) the trial court erred by finding that the defendant knowingly and voluntarily entered into a plea agreement involving an illegal sentence. After a careful review, we find no merit in these issues, and find that the defendant's sentence is legal. The defendant's sentence of incarceration and the court's imposition of restitution is affirmed.

Christine Griffin v. Fireman's Fund Insurance Company,
W1999-02150-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Weatherford, Sr. J.
Trial Court Judge: J. Steven Stafford, Chancellor
This worker's 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 of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The employer's insurance company, Fireman's Fund Insurance Company, appeals the judgment of the Chancery Court of Dyer County where the trial court held that future medical treatment would remain open in the two workers' compensation cases filed by the plaintiff, Ms.Griffin; and if the plaintiff required future medical care, a determination of responsibility would be made based upon the facts presented at that time. For the reasons stated in this opinion, We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Marilyn Skaggs
M1999-00428-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Stella L. Hargrove
The Defendant pleaded guilty to one count of aggravated burglary, one count of theft, and three counts of forgery. The Defendant was sentenced to serve sixty days in jail followed by six years of supervised probation. Subsequently, the Defendant's probation officer alleged that the Defendant violated the terms of her probation for numerous reasons. Following a hearing, the Defendant's probation was revoked. The Defendant now argues the following: (1) that the trial court erred in admitting as an exhibit a computer printout of summary notes, (2) that the trial court erred in admitting as an exhibit a faxed copy of an affidavit in lieu of the actual affidavit, and (3) that the court erred in revoking the Defendant's probation. After a review of the record and applicable law, we find no merit to the Defendant's contentions and thus affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Morgan Lewis Ray vs. State
M1999-00531-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Per Curiam

Morgan Lewis Ray appeals his conviction by a jury in the Bedford County Circuit Court of one count of driving under the influence, fifth offense, a class A misdemeanor, and one count of driving on a revoked license, second or subsequent offense, a class A misdemeanor. The trial court imposed a sentence of eleven months and twenty-nine days incarceration in the Bedford County Jail for driving under the influence, requiring service of one hundred percent of the sentence. The trial court also imposed a sentence of eleven months and twenty-nine days incarceration for driving on a revoked license, requiring service of seventy-five percent of the sentence. On appeal, the appellant presents the following issue for review: whether the evidence produced at trial was sufficient to support both convictions. Following a review of the record and parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Morgan Lewis Ray vs. State
M1999-00531-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: W. Charles Lee
Morgan Lewis Ray appeals his conviction by a jury in the Bedford County Circuit Court of one count of driving under the influence, fifth offense, a class A misdemeanor, and one count of driving on a revoked license, second or subsequent offense, a class A misdemeanor. The trial court imposed a sentence of eleven months and twenty-nine days incarceration in the Bedford County Jail for driving under the influence, requiring service of one hundred percent of the sentence. The trial court also imposed a sentence of eleven months and twenty-nine days incarceration for driving on a revoked license, requiring service of seventy-five percent of the sentence. On appeal, the appellant presents the following issue for review: whether the evidence produced at trial was sufficient to support both convictions. Following a review of the record and parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Susan Blackburn
M1999-00295-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Donald P. Harris
The Defendant, Susan Blackburn, was charged with driving under the influence of an intoxicant and driving with a blood alcohol content of .10 percent or more. She was subsequently tried by jury in Williamson County and found guilty of third-offense driving under the influence. In this appeal as of right, the Defendant argues that the trial court erred by overruling her motion for mistrial based on prosecutorial misconduct, by improperly instructing the jury concerning the Defendant's level of blood alcohol concentration, by allowing the prosecutor to make improper remarks during closing arguments, and by improperly denying the Defendant's motion to suppress the results of her blood tests. We hold that the trial court properly overruled the Defendant's motion for mistrial based on prosecutorial misconduct, that the trial court properly instructed the jury with regard to the Defendant's blood alcohol concentration, that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by overruling the Defendant's objection to remarks made during closing arguments, and that the trial court did not err by overruling the Defendant's motion to suppress the results of her blood tests. Accordingly, we affirm the Defendant's conviction.

Robert L. Taylor v. Michelle Bowers Taylor
E1999-01774-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: G. Richard Johnson

State vs. Robert D. Ring
E1999-02088-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: R. Jerry Beck
After pleading guilty to vehicular homicide by intoxication, a Class B felony, the trial court ordered the defendant to serve his eight-year sentence on intensive probation, in-house arrest circumstances, subject further to the following conditions: (a) zero use of alcohol; (b) not own or drive an automobile; (c) alcohol counseling after evaluation; (d) payment of liquidated restitution to the victim's family within twenty-four (24) months; (e) any other conditions deemed prudent after intake of the Probation Department. The State appeals and asserts that the trial court erred in placing this defendant on probation because the trial court failed to consider the victim's impact testimony at the sentencing hearing. We agree that the trial court misapplied the applicable law characterizing the victim's impact testimony as a "victim's impact statement" and unduly limited the consideration of such statement to enhancing and mitigating factors. However, after de novo review of the record, we affirm the trial court's judgment, after considering all evidence presented, including the victim's impact testimony, concluding that the factors favoring an alternative sentence, specifically intensive probation, clearly outweigh any factors favoring incarceration.

Daylon Demetric Roberts vs. State
E1999-02180-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Ray L. Jenkins
The Defendant was convicted of murder perpetrated in an attempt to commit a robbery. His conviction was affirmed on appeal to this Court, and the Tennessee Supreme Court denied permission to appeal. The Defendant subsequently filed a petition for post-conviction relief. After an evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied the petition. The Defendant now appeals the trial court's denial of post-conviction relief, arguing that conflicts with his attorneys prevented the attorneys from providing him effective assistance of counsel at trial and that the trial court forced him to proceed to trial despite those conflicts. Finding no error in the record before us, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Billy Joe Phillips,a.k.a. Billy Joe West, a.k.a Joseph L. Phillips
E1999-00542-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: E. Eugene Eblen
The defendant was convicted by a jury of one count of driving while his driver's license was revoked, one count of criminal impersonation, and was found guilty of violating the implied consent law. The defendant claims there was insufficient evidence introduced to support his convictions. After a careful review, we affirm the defendant's conviction of criminal impersonation and reverse and dismiss the defendant's conviction for driving on a revoked driver's license.

Reagan vs. Troy Malone, Sandra Malone and Dan Connelly
E1999-01846-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: W. Frank Brown, III
On a Rule 60, T.R.C.P. motion of plaintiff, the Chancellor combined judgments and added interest as one judgment. On appeal, the combined judgment was vacated.

Jack P. Carr vs. David Mills, Warden
E2000-00156-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: E. Eugene Eblen
The petitioner sought writ of habeas corpus, alleging that he was entitled to relief because the judgments of conviction were not signed by the trial judge. We hold unsigned judgments do not render judgments void, such as entitles a defendant to habeas corpus relief. We affirm the trial court's dismissal.

State vs. Greg Hartman
E2000-00685-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Thomas W. Graham
The Defendant was convicted by a Rhea County jury of attempt to commit kidnapping. The Defendant now appeals arguing that there was insufficient evidence presented at trial to convict him of attempt to commit kidnapping. Finding no error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Matthew Johnston
E1999-00496-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: E. Eugene Eblen
A Roane County jury convicted the Defendant of theft of an automobile valued at greater than $1,000.00, a Class D felony. He now appeals, arguing that the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury on the lesser-included offense of unauthorized use of an automobile. We conclude that the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury on the requested lesser-included offense but that the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. Therefore, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Shannon Prier
W1999-01436-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Joseph H. Walker, III
The defendant appeals her conviction for theft over $1,000 for which she received a two-year suspended sentence. The defendant comes before this court raising the following issues: 1) whether the evidence was sufficient to support her conviction; and 2) whether the trial court properly denied her petition for judicial diversion. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Carlos Mcdonald
W1999-01459-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Gary R Wade
Trial Court Judge: Chris B. Craft

State vs. Eddie Taylor
W1999-01803-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Roy B. Morgan, Jr.

State vs. Timothy Higgs
W1999-01534-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: William B. Acree
The defendant appeals from a jury trial conviction for possession of contraband in a penal institution, a Class C felony. In this appeal, the defendant alleges the evidence was not sufficient to support his conviction. Concluding that the evidence was sufficient, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Investments, Inc. vs. Hackney Petroleum, Inc.
E1999-02665-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Jacqueline E. Schulten
In a dispute over the meaning of a notice of termination provision in the Lease, the Trial Judge ruled the notice given did not comply with the Lease and awarded damages for breach. We reverse.

Willard Hawk, Jr., et al vs. Chattanooga Orthopaedic Group, P.,C., et al
E1999-00687-COA-R9-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Samuel H. Payne
This is a medical malpractice case. We granted the plaintiffs' Tenn. R. App. P. 9 application for an interlocutory appeal in order to review an order of the trial court dismissing the amendments to the plaintiffs' original complaint and granting the defendants' motion in limine pertaining to evidence of a disabling hand condition of the defendant surgeon, Dr. David M. O'Neal. We reverse.

Knoxville's Community Development Corp. vs. Woodfam Investments, L. P.,
E1999-02317-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Sharon J. Bell
Plaintiff sued to reform or void release of deed restrictions on property owned by defendant. The Trial Court ruled plaintiff failed to establish a basis for relief by clear and convincing evidence. We affirm.

Bobby Ray Carper v. Ramer Wood Products
W1999-02147-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: William Michael Maloan, Special Judge
Trial Court Judge: Dewey C. Whitenton, 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) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The defendant, Ramer Wood Products (Ramer), appeals the judgment of the McNairy Chancery Court awarding permanent partial disability of thirty percent (3%) to the right arm and twenty-five percent (25%) to the left arm. For the reasons stated in this opinion, we affirm the judgment of the trial court as modified to a single award of twenty-seven and one-half percent (27-1/2%) permanent partial disability to both arms.

Dempsey vs. Dempsey
M1998-00972-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Henry Denmark Bell
This appeal involves the award of alimony and the division of one particular piece of marital property at the dissolution of a nineteen year marriage. Mr. Dempsey appeals the award of alimony in futuro rather than rehabilitative alimony, the amount of alimony as beyond his ability to pay, and the award of a tax refund for the year of the divorce to Ms. Dempsey. We modify the award of alimony in futuro to an award of rehabilitative alimony and affirm the distribution of marital property.

Metropolitan Development & Housing Agency vs. Trinity Marine Nashville, Inc .
M1999-02162-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Barbara N. Haynes
In this eminent domain condemnation proceeding, the Trial Court granted partial summary judgment to the condemnor on the amount of relocation expenses to be awarded the property owner as incidental damages based upon deposition testimony of an officer of the property owner. The property owner argues on appeal that summary judgment is improper in condemnation proceedings, and that the Trial Court erred in excluding from incidental damages amounts for a "burden rate" the property owner added to its actual hourly labor costs incurred in relocating from the condemned property. As the issue is a question of law and there are no questions of disputed material fact, summary judgment is appropriate. As the "burden rate" claimed by the property owner is not recoverable under the applicable statute, the judgment of the Trial Court is affirmed.