State of Tennessee v. Darlene Renee Blackhurst
The defendant, Darlene Renee Blackhurst, pled guilty to second offense driving under the influence of an intoxicant ("DUI"), leaving the scene of an accident involving injury, and three counts of reckless aggravated assault. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court imposed an effective sentence of three years, eleven months, and twenty-nine days, to be served on intensive probation following a mandatory period of 45 days in confinement for the DUI second offense. In this appeal, the State contends that the trial court erred when it placed Defendant on full probation because the trial court failed to properly consider the victim's testimony during the sentencing hearing. Our de novo review reveals that the trial court did err in its application of the law concerning victims' statements and in granting probation for the full time remaining in Defendant's sentence following confinement. However, our conclusion regarding the impropriety of probation is based on sentencing considerations other than the testimony of the victim. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court's judgment regarding the manner of service of Defendant's sentence and remand this matter to the trial court to determine whether Defendant should be incarcerated for the full term of her sentence or, in the alternative, serve the balance of her sentence in split confinement. |
Sullivan | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State ex rel Mickey Phillips vs. Gwen Knox
|
Anderson | Court of Appeals | |
Roy Shanks vs. Hazel Albert
|
Hamblen | Court of Appeals | |
State vs. Edward Coffee
|
Wilson | Supreme Court | |
Margaret Tobitt vs. Bridgestone/Fireston, Inc.
|
Warren | Supreme Court | |
Margaret Tobitt vs. Bridgestone/Fireston, Inc.
|
Warren | Supreme Court | |
State of Tennessee v. Mark A. Doolen, Jr.
In this appeal, Mark A. Doolen, Jr. challenges the order of the Dickson County Circuit Court requiring the appellant's payment of restitution in the amount of $6,611.76 for his vandalism of two antique automobiles. Following a review of the record and the parties' briefs, we conclude that the appellant should have filed his appeal with the Tennessee Court of Appeals. |
Dickson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State v. Mark Doolen
|
Dickson | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Edward Drummer
The Appellant, Edward Drummer, appeals from the dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief by the Shelby County Criminal Court. In September, 1997, Drummer pled guilty to one count of aggravated rape and was sentenced to fifteen years confinement in the Department of Correction. In 1998, Drummer filed a petition for post-conviction relief challenging the validity of his guilty plea upon grounds of (1) voluntariness and (2) ineffective assistance of counsel. The post-conviction court, finding the claims unsupported, dismissed the petition. On appeal, Drummer contends that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel. After review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Wygenzo Coburn
The defendant was convicted of voluntary manslaughter, a Class C felony, and sentenced as a Range I, standard offender to four years, six months in the county workhouse. In this appeal as of right, he raises the following issues: (1) whether the evidence was sufficient to support his conviction; (2) whether the trial court erred in failing to include "moral certainty" language in its reasonable doubt instruction to the jury; and (3) whether the trial court erred in its application of enhancement factor (10). Based upon a careful review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Thomas Wynns III vs. Rae Cummings
|
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Ralph D. Cooper
This is an appeal from an order denying a petition for reinstatement of a motor vehicle operator's license pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated Section 55-10-615(b). The court ruled that a subsequent conviction for driving without a license precluded the court from restoring the petitioner's driving privileges for a period of three years after the new conviction. After a careful review, we hold that the court incorrectly concluded it did not have discretion to grant driving privileges and remand to the court for reconsideration of the petition. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Guy Varnadoe vs. Shelton McGhee Jr.
|
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
James Ray vs. Billy Williams
|
Lauderdale | Court of Appeals | |
Richard Crowe vs. First American
|
McNairy | Court of Appeals | |
Scarlett/Patrick Spencer vs. James Aydlotte
|
Gibson | Court of Appeals | |
Paul Seaton, et al vs. Richard Rowe, et al
|
Monroe | Court of Appeals | |
Myron Hubbard vs. Sandi Hubbard
|
Blount | Court of Appeals | |
Linda Greene vs. Dr. Woody Stinson
|
Jefferson | Court of Appeals | |
Linda Greene vs. Dr. Woody Stinson
|
Jefferson | Court of Appeals | |
George Tipton vs. Axis Fabrication & Machine Co.
|
Blount | Court of Appeals | |
George Tipton vs. Axis Fabrication & Machine Co.
|
Blount | Court of Appeals | |
Rouse Construction Co. vs. Interstate Steel Corp.
|
Knox | Court of Appeals | |
Carl O. Koella, Jr. vs. Fred McHargue, et ux
|
Blount | Court of Appeals | |
Jeffrey Miller v. State of Tennessee
Jeffrey Miller appeals the Meigs County Criminal Court's dismissal of his petitions for writ of error coram nobis and writ of habeas corpus. Both petitions seek redress for Miller's grievance that he has been required to serve felony sentences in the Department of Correction, although his plea agreements designated the location of confinement to be the Meigs County Jail. Because neither coram nobis nor habeas corpus relief is available to address a concern of this nature and because the petitioner's claims are factually unfounded, we affirm. |
Meigs | Court of Criminal Appeals |