Clemmye Mullenix Berger v. Brenda O'Brien,
|
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
W2002-02166-COA-R3-CV
|
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
Jimmy Ray Robinson v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner appeals from the post-conviction court’s denial of relief. He contends he received ineffective assistance of counsel. After careful review, we affirm the post-conviction court’s denial of relief. |
Dyer | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
James Jackson vs. Jackson, Johnson & Murphey
|
Hamilton | Court of Appeals | |
Ronnie Johnson vs. Mark R. White
|
Knox | Court of Appeals | |
CH-02-0609-1
|
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
J.M. Cox, Jr. v. East Tennessee Natural Gas
|
Washington | Court of Appeals | |
Patricia Lyman v. Lawrence James
|
Hamilton | Court of Appeals | |
Combustion Federal Credit Union vs. John Farmer
|
Hamilton | Court of Appeals | |
Frankie Maples vs. Frank Maples
|
Knox | Court of Appeals | |
Cordell Taylor vs. Donnie & Vick Williams
|
Morgan | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Joel Anthony Davenport
The Defendant, Joel Anthony Davenport, pled guilty to multiple counts of passing worthless checks and was sentenced to probation. The Defendant's probation was violated and revoked. Upon revocation, the trial court sentenced the Defendant, and the Defendant asserts that he was sentenced to four years of incarceration, plus an additional year for the count which violated his probation, to be served consecutively to a six year sentence in another county. Accordingly, the Defendant asserts that his sentence was to total eleven years. The Tennessee Department of Corrections report showed that the Defendant was sentenced to fourteen years, not eleven, and the Defendant filed a motion with the trial court to enter an order correcting the "clerical mistake." The trial court denied that motion and the Defendant appeals. Finding no error in the trial court's denial of the Defendant's motion, we affirm. |
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Rena Thompson vs. Charles Hensley
|
Monroe | Court of Appeals | |
W2003-00334-COA-R3-CV
|
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
Nancy Gail (Paulk) Doran v. Oather Paul Doran
|
Hardin | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Donald Franks
A Hardin County jury convicted the defendant, Donald Franks, of rape of a child. The trial court sentenced the defendant to thirty-seven years as a Range II multiple offender. On appeal, the defendant argues: (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction; (2) the trial court erred in instructing the jury on flight; and (3) the trial court imposed an excessive sentence. Based upon our review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Hardin | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
W2003-00001-COA-R3-CV
|
Hardin | Court of Appeals | |
Brian & Candy Chadwick v. Chad Spence
|
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
Russell A. Siegfried v. The Grand Krewe of Sphinx,
|
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
Eddie Belcher vs. State
|
Court of Appeals | ||
Pache Industries vs. Wallace Hardware
|
Hamblen | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Paul Regan, Alias
The defendant appeals the trial court's denial of judicial diversion contending that the court abused its discretion by not articulating specific reasons on the record for the denial. We agree with the defendant and remand for a new sentencing hearing in order for the trial court to place its reasoning upon the record. |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Jeremy Christopher Hwang
The defendant appeals the trial court's revocation of his probation, arguing that his due process rights were violated because (1) the trial court allowed the State to amend the revocation petition to include as additional grounds his subsequent convictions for theft and criminal impersonation, without providing him prior written notice; and (2) the trial court failed to issue adequate findings of fact in support of its decision. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Michael S. Stacy
The defendant appeals the trial court's dismissal of his motion for correction of an illegal sentence. Pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, the defendant entered a nolo contendere plea to a Class B felony and was sentenced by the trial court as a Range I, standard offender to ten years, two years above the presumptive minimum sentence in the range. Subsequently, the defendant filed a pro se motion to correct an illegal sentence, arguing that the trial court violated the requirements of the 1989 Sentencing Reform Act by failing to state enhancement factors to support the increase in his sentence from the presumptive minimum eight-year sentence. The trial court dismissed the motion, and the defendant appealed to this court. Finding no error, we affirm the trial court's dismissal of the defendant's motion to correct illegal sentence. |
Sullivan | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. James H. Thompson
Following a conviction for DUI, third offense, after entering a guilty plea, Defendant James H. Thompson appeals, asserting that he has presented a certified question of law for review. Because we conclude that the question of law, even if properly reserved at the guilty plea hearing, is not dispositive of the case, we dismiss the appeal. |
Franklin | Court of Criminal Appeals |