State of Tennessee v. Reginald Henderson
W2000-00607-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge W. Fred Axley

The defendant was convicted of second degree murder for a shooting which occurred during a birthday outing at a nightclub and was sentenced to confinement for twenty years. He appealed, raising as issues, that the trial court erred: (1) in not correctly instructing the jury as to reasonable doubt; (2) in admitting proof of another bad act of the defendant; (3) in not allowing impeachment with prior convictions of a prosecution witness; (4) in allowing proof as to a prior consistent statement; and (5) in requiring the defendant to show his teeth to the jury. Based upon our review, we affirm the judgment of conviction of the trial court.

Shelby Court of Criminal Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Luke B. Cole
W2000-01530-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Judge W. Otis Higgs, Jr.

The Defendant, Luke B. Cole, was convicted by a jury of second degree murder in the shooting death of David Burson. The trial court sentenced the Defendant as a Range I, violent offender to twenty years incarceration. In this appeal as of right, the Defendant contends that the trial court erred in ruling admissible certain photographs of the victim; that the trial court erred in admitting certain rebuttal evidence submitted by the State; and that his sentence is excessive. Finding no reversible error in the Defendant’s trial, we affirm his conviction. Finding that the trial court erred
in sentencing the Defendant, we modify his sentence to seventeen years.

Shelby Court of Criminal Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Quincy Davis
W2000-01399-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge Chris B. Craft

The defendant and his four co-defendants were indicted for the aggravated robbery of a convenience store in Memphis. He was convicted of this offense, while a co-defendant was convicted for robbery. The defendant was sentenced to ten years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The defendant appealed his conviction, asserting as the single assignment of error that the verdicts were inconsistent, and, therefore, his conviction could not stand. Based upon our review, we affirm the judgment of conviction.

Shelby Court of Criminal Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Lawrence Douglas
W2000-01749-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge Bernie Weinman

The defendant, Lawrence Douglas, was indicted by a Shelby County Grand Jury for one count of especially aggravated robbery and one count of attempted first degree murder, both Class A felonies. He was found guilty of especially aggravated robbery and attempted second degree murder, a Class B felony, and sentenced to twenty years for the especially aggravated robbery conviction at 100% and a concurrent sentence of twelve years for the attempted second degree murder conviction, as a Range I, standard offender, for an effective sentence of twenty years. The defendant challenges: (1) the ruling of the trial court excluding testimony of the defendant's grandmother concerning his childhood and (2) his sentences. Finding no error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. However, we remand for entry of corrected judgments in order that the appropriate classes of the convictions may be indicated on the judgments.

Shelby Court of Criminal Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Jerry Ray Simpson
E2000-02277-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Judge D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.

A Blount County jury convicted the Defendant, Jerry Ray Simpson of driving under the influence and driving on a revoked license. In this appeal as of right, the Defendant raises the single issue of whether the trial court erred by failing to strike an alternate juror for cause due to his employment as a police officer in an adjacent jurisdiction. Finding no error, we affirm the trial court's judgment.

Blount Court of Criminal Appeals

Johnny McGowan vs. Jimmy Farr II, et al
E2000-02519-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Frank V. Williams, III
Johnny McGowan ("Plaintiff"), an inmate at the Brushy Mountain Correctional Complex filed this lawsuit against the various defendants alleging violations of federal and state law after medication was confiscated from his cell. Plaintiff improperly filed a grievance which was returned to him with instructions on how to properly process same. Instead of refiling the grievance in accordance with proper procedure, Plaintiff filed this lawsuit. The Trial Court granted summary judgment to the defendants. We affirm, concluding that Plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies which bars all of his claims.

Morgan Court of Appeals

Myron Garmon v. State of Tennessee
W2000-01556-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Judge W. Fred Axley

The petitioner was convicted of aggravated sexual battery by a Shelby County jury. The conviction was affirmed on direct appeal. The petitioner sought post-conviction relief on the ground that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to protect his right to be tried within one hundred eighty days under the Interstate Compact on Detainers. The petition was denied by the post-conviction court. After a thorough review of the record, we conclude that the trial court correctly denied post-conviction relief.

Shelby Court of Criminal Appeals

James Dumas v. State of Tennessee
W2000-01814-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge L. Terry Lafferty

The petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief, claiming that he had received ineffective assistance of counsel during the sentencing hearing following his trial in which he was convicted of second degree murder. Specifically, he argues that trial counsel should have presented evidence of his youth and mental condition. The petitioner appealed after being denied relief by the post-conviction court. Based upon our review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

Shelby Court of Criminal Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Adrian Crane
W2000-01892-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Special Judge Cornelia A. Clark
Trial Court Judge: Judge Bernie Weinman

A Shelby County jury convicted the defendant of rape of a child, a Class A felony. The sole issue in this appeal is the sufficiency of the evidence of unlawful sexual penetration of the victim. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Shelby Court of Criminal Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Tyrone Brown
W2000-02206-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge Arthur T. Bennett

The defendant was convicted of especially aggravated robbery and was sentenced to eighteen years as a violent offender. He appealed, presenting as his single issue the claim that the evidence at trial was not sufficient for the finding of guilt. Based upon our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Shelby Court of Criminal Appeals

Kevin Burns v. State of Tennessee
W2000-02871-CCA-R9-PD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Judge James C. Beasley, Jr.

The petitioner, currently represented by the Office of the Post-Conviction Defender, was originally convicted of felony murder and sentenced to death. The petitioner's conviction and sentence were affirmed on direct appeal. See State v. Burns, 979 S.W.2d 276 (Tenn. 1998). After the filing of a post-conviction relief petition, the post-conviction court granted the state's request to disqualify the Post-Conviction Defender since a member of the Post-Conviction Defender Commission was related to the victim of the crime. In this interlocutory appeal, the petitioner argues: (1) there is no conflict of interest; and (2) if a conflict exists, it can be waived. After a thorough review of the record, we conclude that (1) there is no actual conflict, and (2) any alleged impropriety may be waived by the petitioner after full disclosure. We reverse and remand for further proceedings.

Shelby Court of Criminal Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Glenda Eva Tilley
E2001-00264-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Phyllis H. Miller

The defendant takes issue with the trial court's imposition of split confinement for her conviction of theft over $10,000. Based upon our review, we affirm the sentence imposed.

Sullivan Court of Criminal Appeals

In Re: Estate of Gloria Eleanor Franklin
E2000-02687-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Telford E. Forgerty, Jr.

This is apparently a case of first impression. The appellant, W. Jess Waltman, filed a petition in the trial court seeking to probate a document purporting to be the last will and testament of Gloria Eleanor Franklin ("the decedent"). The will, dated "July 7 93," directs that the appellant and his wife, Terry Waltman, are to receive the decedent's estate "in case I die on my way to & from Jersey." The trial court held that the will was not eligible for probate because it was a conditional will and the specified condition or contingency, i.e., Ms. Franklin's demise "on the way to & from Jersey," had not occurred. We vacate the trial court's judgment and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Cocke Court of Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Ricky R. Bowen
E2000-02498-CCA-R9-CO
Authoring Judge: Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Judge Phyllis H. Miller

The defendant, Ricky R. Bowen, is charged with driving under the influence of an intoxicant (DUI). The state was granted an interlocutory appeal from the trial court's order dismissing the second "count" of the indictment by which the defendant was subjected to enhanced minimum sentencing as a second time offender. The issue presented is whether a conviction for the first DUI offense must precede the commission of the second offense before a defendant may be convicted of DUI, second offense. We hold that the conviction must only precede the second conviction, not the second offense.

Sullivan Court of Criminal Appeals

Jacqueline Telford v. Michael Telford
M2000-02938-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Leonard W. Martin
This appeal from the Chancery Court of Cheatham County questions whether the Trial Court erred in awarding Ms. Telford alimony in the amount of $1,000.00 per month, and in granting Ms. Telford a judgment of $21,040.00 as the amount owing on the property division. Additionally, this appeal questions whether the Trial Court erred in limiting alimony to eight years and whether the Trial Court erred in failing to grant retroactive child support. We vacate the decision of the Trial Court in part and affirm as modified in part and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. We divide costs of the appeal equally between the Appellant, Michael Allen Telford, and the Appellee, Jacqueline M. Telford.

Cheatham Court of Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Edwin Beard
M2000-02886-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge L. Terry Lafferty
Trial Court Judge: Judge Robert L. Jones

After a jury trial, Defendant was found guilty of the included offense of simple assault in two counts and the jury assessed fines of $5,000 for each count. Defendant was subsequently sentenced to 11 months and 29 days on each count to run concurrently. The sentence was suspended except for 12 days to be served consecutively or six consecutive weekends. The fines were remitted to $500 for each count. In this direct appeal as of right, Defendant asserts that the jury and court erred in finding Defendant guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt, in two counts of simple assault based upon the sufficiency of evidence. We conclude that the evidence was sufficient to support Defendant's two convictions for simple assault. Thus, we affirm the trial court's judgment.

Maury Court of Criminal Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Randy Tyrone Crawford
M2000-02358-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge L. Terry Lafferty
Trial Court Judge: Judge Jane W. Wheatcraft

At the conclusion of a probation revocation hearing, the trial court ordered Defendant to serve six (6) years at thirty percent (30%) in the Department of Correction for the sale of cocaine. In this appeal as of right, Defendant asserts that the trial court failed to sentence him in accordance with the Criminal Sentencing Reform Act of 1989. We conclude that the evidence was sufficient to support the revocation of Defendant's probation and the trial court did not abuse its discretion by ordering Defendant confined per his original sentence. Thus, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Sumner Court of Criminal Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Donald J. Moore - Dissenting
M2000-02621-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Judge John W. Rollins

I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion in this case. First, I am compelled to note that there is not a transcript of the guilty plea hearing in the record. It is well settled that when a defendant appeals a sentencing issue and fails to provide a transcript of the guilty plea hearing in the record, that this court presumes that the action of the trial court was correct. See State v. Keen, 996 S.W.2d 842, 844 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1999); State v. Griffis, 964 S.W.2d 577, 592-93 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997).

Coffee Court of Criminal Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Donald J. Moore
M2000-02621-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge L. Terry Lafferty
Trial Court Judge: Judge John W. Rollins

At the conclusion of a sentencing hearing, the trial court imposed a sentence of 11 months and 29 days in the Coffee County jail with Defendant to serve 90 days before being released to probation for the offense of simple possession of a controlled substance, to wit: methamphetamine, plus a fine of $1,000. In this appeal as of right, Defendant asserts: (1) That the trial court abused its discretion in failing to sentence the Defendant to judicial diversion provided by Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-313; (2) Whether the trial court properly weighed the mitigating factors presented by Defendant in the sentencing hearing?; and (3) Whether the trial court imposed an excessive sentence? After a review of the entire record, briefs of parties, oral arguments and applicable law, we find the trial court
abused its discretion in denying judicial diversion and remand for a judgment of judicial diversion.  Thus, the trial court’s judgment is reversed and remanded.

Coffee Court of Criminal Appeals

Hershell Lee Kinnaird v. State of Tennessee
M2000-00037-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Judge Leon C. Burns, Jr.

The Defendant, Hershell Lee Kinnaird, was convicted by a jury in 1989 of accessory before the fact to first degree murder and conspiracy to commit first degree murder. He was sentenced to life imprisonment for the former conviction and to a concurrent ten year term for the latter conviction. The Defendant's convictions were affirmed on direct appeal. See State v. Kinnaird, 823 S.W.2d 571, 572 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1991). In this post-conviction proceeding the Defendant contends that the State violated his constitutional rights by withholding exculpatory evidence; that the post-conviction court erred by not granting his motion for state-funded experts; that he received ineffective assistance of counsel at trial; and that the trial court committed several instances of plain error violating his right to a fair trial and/or due process. Finding the Defendant's allegations to be without merit, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

Putnam Court of Criminal Appeals

Mario Lambert v. Jack Morgan, Warden
M1999-02321-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Judge Timothy L. Easter

The Defendant, Mario Lambert, appeals as of right from the trial court's dismissal of his petition for writ of habeas corpus. He asserts that his sentence is illegal because the trial court was without authority to sentence him as a Range I, standard offender with a release eligibility of thirty percent for the offense of second degree murder. We hold that the trial court was without authority to sentence the Defendant as a Range I, standard offender with a thirty percent release eligibility for the offense of second degree murder. Therefore, based on our review of the record on appeal, it appears that the sentence imposed is an illegal sentence. Accordingly, we remand this case to the criminal court of Shelby County for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Hickman Court of Criminal Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Quinton A. Cage
M2000-01989-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge L. Terry Lafferty
Trial Court Judge: Judge James E. Walton

At the conclusion of a post-conviction evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied the Petitioner, Quinton Cage's, petition for post-conviction relief. The Petitioner presents one appellate issue: Whether the trial court erred in finding that the Petitioner received effective assistance of counsel at trial? After a review of the entire record, briefs of the parties, and applicable law, we affirm the trial court's judgment.

Montgomery Court of Criminal Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Stephen Michael Ware
E2000-01952-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Gary R Wade
Trial Court Judge: Judge Lynn W. Brown

The defendant, Stephen Michael Ware, pled guilty to driving under the influence (third offense), driving on a revoked license (second offense), felony evading arrest, resisting arrest and felony failure to appear. The plea agreement provided for consecutive sentences of one year each for felony evading arrest and felony failure to appear. All other sentences were to be served concurrently, for an effective sentence of two years. The trial court ordered a sentence of split confinement, consisting of 270 days in jail, two years of house arrest, on one felony and a consecutive sentence of two years' house arrest for the second felony. In this appeal of right, the defendant argues that the trial court imposed sentences in contravention of the plea agreement and contends that the jail sentence of 270 days, day-for-day, is excessive. The felony evading arrest sentence is vacated and the cause is remanded to the trial court for resentencing in conformance with the plea agreement

Washington Court of Criminal Appeals

Denny Cain v. Whirlpool Corporation,
M2000-01688-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Joe C. Loser, Jr., Sp. J.
Trial Court Judge: J. O. Bond, Judge
In this appeal, the employer insists (1) the trial court erred in admitting into evidence the testimony of a chiropractor in an action involving a shoulder injury, (2) the award of permanent partial disability benefits is excessive and (3) the trial court erred in awarding as discretionary costs expenses for the taking of the chiropractor's deposition. As discussed below, the judgment is modified by reducing the award of permanent partial disability benefits to one equal to two and one-half times the clinical impairment rating, but otherwise affirmed.

Wilson Workers Compensation Panel

James A. Hodge v. Jones Holding Company, Inc.
M1998-00955-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge F. Lee Russell

This appeal involves a motorcycle rider who was seriously injured when his motorcycle crossed metal plates covering a portion of the highway surface that was under construction. After voluntarily dismissing his first suit, the rider filed a second suit in the Circuit Court for Lincoln County against the corporation he believed to be responsible for placing the metal plates across the highway. The rider insisted on proceeding against this corporation even after he was informed that he had sued the wrong party. The corporation moved for a directed verdict at the close of the motorcycle rider's case-in-chief, asserting that he had failed to prove that it was responsible for the road construction. The trial court granted the motion and dismissed the rider's complaint. The rider now challenges the directed verdict on two grounds. First, he asserts that he presented enough evidence of the contractor's responsibility for the construction to take the case to the jury. Second, he asserts that the corporation should not be permitted to argue that he sued the wrong party because it had not specifically identified or described this party in its answer as required by Tenn. R. Civ. P. 8.03. We have determined that the corporation's denial of involvement with the construction project at issue was was not asserting an affirmative defense governed by Tenn. R. Civ. P. 8.03 and that the trial court properly granted the directed verdict. Therefore, we affirm the judgment dismissing the motorcycle rider's complaint.

Lincoln Court of Appeals