State of Tennessee v. Mark A. Scarborough
M2000-01359-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Timothy L. Easter

State vs. Curtis Emery Duke
M2000-00350-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: William Charles Lee
The appellant, Curtis Emery Duke, was convicted in the Marshall County Circuit Court of two counts of the sale of crack cocaine, one count of possession of crack cocaine with the intent to sell, two counts of criminal impersonation, and one count of failure to appear. The trial court sentenced the appellant to a total effective sentence of thirty-nine years. On appeal, the appellant raises the following issues for our review: (1) whether the evidence presented at trial was sufficient to sustain the appellant's convictions; (2) whether the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury on the lesser-included offense of simple possession; and (3) whether the trial court erred in sentencing the appellant. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgments of the trial court as modified.

Clifton vs. Acosta-Delgado
M2000-00253-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Muriel Robinson
This is a post-divorce child custody dispute. The mother filed a petition to regain custody of the parties' three children after she had entered into an agreed order in 1995 granting custody to the defendant father. After hearing testimony on, inter alia, the father driving while intoxicated with the children in the car with him, the trial court found a material change in circumstances, granted custody to the mother, and ordered the father to pay child support. The father appeals, arguing that there was not a material change in circumstances sufficient to warrant a change in custody, that the trial court inappropriately considered his child support arrearage prior to the 1995 agreed order, and that the trial court miscalculated his income, resulting in an unreasonably high child support award. We affirm, finding a material change in circumstances warranting a change in custody, and finding that the evidence does not preponderate against the award of child support.

State of Tennesse v. Michael Herndon
M2000-01080-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: John H. Gasaway, III

State vs. Gregory Lynn Redden
M2000-00988-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Robert W. Wedemeyer
The Appellant, Gregory Lynn Redden, was convicted by a Robertson County jury of burglary, theft of property over $1,000, and criminal impersonation. He received concurrent sentences of twelve years for burglary, twelve years for theft of property, and six months for criminal impersonation. On appeal, the Appellant raises the following three issues for our review: (1) whether the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict; (2) whether the trial court erred in not excusing two jurors for cause during voir dire; and (3) whether the trial court erred by allowing the statement of the Appellant's confession into evidence. After review, we find no error and affirm the judgment.

State vs. Harold Bayuk
M2000-01654-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Timothy L. Easter
The Appellant, Harold M. Bayuk, was convicted by a Hickman County Circuit Court jury of one count of driving under the influence of an intoxicant and one count of driving on a revoked license. Following his conviction for DUI, the Appellant waived his right to jury sentencing and agreed to submit the issue of enhanced punishment to the trial court. The trial court found the Appellant guilty of DUI, third offense, and sentenced him to eleven months twenty-nine days, with 150 days to be served in confinement. On appeal, the Appellant argues that the trial court erred in sentencing him to serve 150 days instead of the statutory minimum of 120 days. After review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court in part, vacate in part, and remand this case to the trial court for entry of an amended judgment of conviction.

State of Tennessee v. Clyde Smith
M2002-2138-CCA-R3-CD
Trial Court Judge: John H. Gasaway, III

State vs. Vincent Sims
W1998-00634-SC-DDT-DD
Authoring Judge: Justice Janice M. Holder
Trial Court Judge: Joseph B. Dailey

State vs. Vincent Sims
W1998-00634-SC-DDT-DD
Authoring Judge: Justice Janice M. Holder
Trial Court Judge: Joseph B. Dailey

State vs. James P. Stout
W1998-00079-SC-DDT-DD
Authoring Judge: Justice E. Riley Anderson
Trial Court Judge: Joseph B. Dailey

State vs. Antonio Kendrick
W1997-00157-SC-R11-CD
Authoring Judge: Justice E. Riley Anderson
Trial Court Judge: Arthur T. Bennett
We granted this appeal to determine whether the prosecution's failure to elect the particular offense of aggravated rape upon which it sought to convict the defendant constituted plain error and required a new trial. The main purpose of the election requirement is to preserve a defendant's right to a unanimous jury verdict under the Tennessee Constitution. A majority of the Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the defendant's conviction for one count of aggravated rape without examining the election issue. After reviewing the record and controlling authority, we conclude that the prosecution's failure to elect the particular offense upon which it sought to convict the defendant failed to preserve the defendant's rights under the Tennessee Constitution and constituted plain error. The judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals is reversed, and the case is remanded to the trial court for a new trial.

D&E Construction Co. vs. Robert J. Denley Co.
W1998-00445-SC-R11-CV
Authoring Judge: Justice William M. Barker
Trial Court Judge: Walter L. Evans
The contractor submitted to arbitration a contractual payment dispute with the project owner arising from a contract to build a subdivision in Collierville. The arbitrators found in favor of the contractor and included an award of attorney's fees. The trial court determined that the arbitration panel exceeded its authority in awarding attorney's fees and vacated the arbitration award. The Court of Appeals reversed, reinstating the entire award. We hold that when the arbitrators awarded attorney's fees, they exceeded their authority by awarding upon a matter not within the scope of the contract's arbitration provision. Therefore, we reverse in part the judgment of the Court of Appeals and vacate the award of attorney's fees.

Michael Carlton Bailey vs. State
M1999-01065-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry Smith
Trial Court Judge: Robert E. Burch
The appellant, Michael Carlton Bailey, appeals from the trial court's denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. On appeal, the appellant challenges the trial court's determination that (1) he received the effective assistance of counsel, and (2) that he was not denied due process by the alleged violation of Tennessee Rule of Evidence 615 by two State witnesses.

Suzanne Burlew vs. Brad Burlew
M1998-01177-SC-R11-CV
Trial Court Judge: Floyd Peete, Jr.
The issue in this divorce case concerns the type and amount of alimony that should be awarded to the Wife. The trial court awarded her $220,000 of alimony in solido to be paid out in decreasing amounts over eight years, and declined to award her rehabilitative alimony. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's in solido award but remanded the case to the trial court to award rehabilitative alimony of at least $1,000 per month for a reasonable period of time. Before this Court, the Husband/appellee argues that rehabilitative alimony is unnecessary and that the alimony in solido award is excessive. The Wife/appellant counters that the in solido award was not excessive; indeed, she argues that she should have been awarded alimony in futuro. We hold that the trial court properly awarded alimony in solido rather than alimony in futuro. We also hold that the trial court did not err in denying the Wife's request for rehabilitative alimony. Thus, we affirm in part and reverse in part the decision of the Court of Appeals.

State vs. G'dongalay Berry and Christopher Davis
M1999-00824-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry Smith
Trial Court Judge: J. Randall Wyatt, Jr.
A jury convicted the defendants of first degree murder in the shooting death of Adrian Dickerson. For this offense, the defendants received life sentences. They now appeal their convictions bringing three issues each. More specifically, G'dongalay Berry contends (1) that the trial court erred by not granting his request for a severance while allowing testimony concerning Berry's co-defendant's solicitation of a witness to commit a separate murder four months after this event; (2) that the uncorroborated testimony of accomplices is insufficient to sustain his conviction; and, similarly, (3) that the evidence presented is "insufficient, as a matter of law, for a rational trier of fact to find the defendant guilty of first degree murder." In addition, Christopher Davis alleges (1) that the trial court committed prejudicial error by allowing testimony concerning gang activity and membership; (2) that the trial court's admission of testimony regarding Davis' aforementioned solicitation to commit murder four months after this crime occurred constituted prejudicial error; and, (3) that should this court deem these alleged errors harmless individually, the cumulative effect of such mistakes deprived him of due process by making the trial fundamentally unfair. Having reviewed all of these issues and finding that none provide a basis for relief to either defendant, we affirm the trial court's judgment.

State vs. William "Butch" Osepczuk
M1999-00846-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Stella L. Hargrove
William Osepczuk was convicted of criminal attempt to commit first degree murder and was sentenced to twenty-five years in the Department of Correction. He now appeals his conviction challenging the sufficiency of the convicting evidence based upon the non credible testimony of the victim and the erroneous admission of non relevant physical evidence. Finding the proof more than sufficient to support his conviction, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Carl Bolin
M1999-00849-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry Smith
Trial Court Judge: Robert W. Wedemeyer
The defendant, Carl Dean Bolin, was convicted by a Montgomery County Circuit Court jury of reckless homicide, a Class D felony. The trial court sentenced the defendant as a Range I, standard offender to four years in the Department of Correction. On appeal, the defendant contends that the trial court erred in sentencing him to the maximum of four years and by ordering that his sentence be served in the Department of Correction. After a careful review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Stephen T. Mays a/k/a Stephen T. Mayes
M2000-00602-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Cheryl A. Blackburn
The Appellant, Stephen T. Mays, pled guilty to two counts of theft of property over $10,000 and received two concurrent five-year sentences. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court imposed split confinement sentences and ordered the Appellant to serve a ninety-day period of confinement. The court also ordered restitution with scheduled payments over a ten-year period. On appeal, the Appellant argues (1) that the trial court erred in failing to grant the Appellant's request for total probation; and (2) that the trial court improperly established restitution. After review, the judgment of the Davidson County Criminal Court is affirmed.

State vs. Glenn Tidwell
M2000-00538-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry Smith
Trial Court Judge: Frank G. Clement, Jr.
The State of Tennessee appeals from the trial court's dismissal of an indictment for DUI against the appellee, Glenn Tidwell. The trial court determined that the indictment should be dismissed because Tidwell's right to a speedy trial had been violated. After a review of the record, we find that the appellee's right to a speedy trial was violated by the delay in bringing him to trial. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

State vs. William Clouse
M2000-00436-CCA-R9-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: J. Richard Mcgregor

State vs. William Clouse
M2000-00436-CCA-R9-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: J. Richard Mcgregor

State vs. Keith Slater
M2000-00486-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry Smith
Trial Court Judge: Jim T. Hamilton
Following a confession, Keith Slater, the Defendant and Appellant, was indicted by a Giles County Grand Jury for premeditated first-degree murder. The Defendant moved to suppress his confession, but the trial court denied his motion. The Defendant was then tried, convicted and sentenced to life in prison. The Defendant appealed that conviction, and a panel of this Court remanded the case to the trial court for another suppression hearing. The trial court held that hearing and again dismissed the Defendant's suppression motion. Because the evidence does not preponderate against the trial court's findings, we affirm its judgment.

William Floyd vs. State
M2000-00318-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: J. S. Daniel
William Floyd appeals the dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. In 1998, Floyd pled guilty to two counts of rape and, under the terms of his plea agreement, was sentenced to twenty years imprisonment. In his petition for post-conviction relief, Floyd contends that his guilty pleas are involuntary because on the date his pleas were entered he was under the influence of prescribed psychotropic drugs. The petition was dismissed by the post-conviction court and this appeal follows. Finding that the evidence in the record does not support Floyd's claim, we affirm the lower court's dismissal.

State vs. Larry Wilkins
M2000-01225-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Donald P. Harris
The appellant, Larry Wilkins, pled guilty in the Williamson County Circuit Court to two counts of the class D felony of causing a computer system to be accessed for the purpose of obtaining $1,000 or more for himself or another by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises. For these offenses, the trial court imposed concurrent sentences of three years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction, suspending all but one year of the appellant's sentences and placing him on supervised probation for four years. Additionally, the trial court imposed fines amounting to $1,500 and ordered restitution amounting to $4,500. The appellant now appeals the trial court's sentencing determinations. Specifically, notwithstanding the trial court's imposition of alternative sentences of split confinement, the appellant contends that the trial court should have granted him either total probation or placement in a community corrections program. Following a review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm in part and reverse in part the judgments of the trial court, and we remand this case to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

State vs. Anterrian Jutiki Gunn
M1999-02140-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry Smith
Trial Court Judge: John H. Gasaway, III
The State of Tennessee appeals from the trial court grant of the defendant's, Anterrian Juitiki Gunn, motion to suppress. We reverse the trial judge's decision and remand pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 12 (e) for a determination of the essential facts necessary to determine the propriety of the trial court's granting of the defendant's motion to suppress.