Opinions

Tammy Elizabeth Hickman & Danny Ray Hickman vs. Eugenia Darlene Hickman
E2000-00927-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Jeffrey F. Stewart
Plaintiffs sued to terminate the mother's parental rights. The Trial Judge held plaintiffs failed to carry the burden of proof. We affirm.

Dudley vs. Dudley
M1998-00982-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Carol A. Catalano
In this divorce case, the trial court awarded the divorce to the Wife and divided the property. Husband appeals the award of the marital residence and its contents to Wife. We affirm.

Turner vs. Turner
M1999-00482-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Marietta M. Shipley
This is a divorce case. Following a bench trial, the court below (1) granted a divorce to wife; (2) divided the marital property; (3) awarded wife alimony in the form of a $1,640.55 monthly payment out of husband's retirement account; and (4) declared that the alimony award was to be secured by the husband's retirement account. Husband appeals the alimony award, the use of the retirement account as security for the payment of alimony, and the trial court's division of the marital property. Wife takes issue with the division of the parties' marital property. We affirm.

Turner vs. Turner
M1999-00482-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Marietta M. Shipley
This is a divorce case. Following a bench trial, the court below (1) granted a divorce to wife; (2) divided the marital property; (3) awarded wife alimony in the form of a $1,640.55 monthly payment out of husband's retirement account; and (4) declared that the alimony award was to be secured by the husband's retirement account. Husband appeals the alimony award, the use of the retirement account as security for the payment of alimony, and the trial court's division of the marital property. Wife takes issue with the division of the parties' marital property. We affirm.

Lassiter vs. Lassiter
M1999-00374-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Carol A. Catalano
This case involves a divorce ending a seven-year marriage. The divorce was awarded to the wife on grounds of the husband's inappropriate marital conduct. The trial court divided the property and debts according to the parties' stipulations. The court then awarded the wife alimony in futuro and ordered the husband to pay $750 of the wife's attorney fees. The husband appeals the awards of alimony and attorney fees. We affirm.

State Dept. of Children's Svcs. vs. L.S., In the Matter of D.S.
M1999-00847-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: John J. Maddux
The Trial Court removed minor child from the parental home on grounds child was dependent and neglected. We affirm.

Joiner vs. Metro Gov't
M2000-00413-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Soloman
The Trial Court entered consent Judgment over objection of defendant. We vacate Judgment and remand.

Moss vs. TN Board of Paroles
M2000-00128-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
At the hearing where appellant's parole was revoked, the Hearing Officer admitted sworn statements of alleged victims. The Trial Court upheld the revocation. We affirm.

Wilson vs. So. Centr. Corr. Facility Disciplinary Bd
M2000-00303-COA-RM-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Jim T. Hamilton
An inmate in a privately operated prison filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari against the disciplinary board at that facility. The trial court dismissed his petition for failure to state a claim. We affirm

Franklin Nat'l Bank vs. Prowell
M2000-00580-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Jeffrey S. Bivins
The Circuit Court of Williamson County refused to issue a writ of certiorari to review a judgment of the General Sessions Court of that county because the petition was untimely and the same issues were already pending in an action in Maury County. We affirm.

State vs. Chris Wilson a/k/a Calvin Clark
M1998-00395-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: John H. Gasaway, III
Following a "best interest" plea to one count of aggravated burglary, the appellant was sentenced to a term of five years in the Department of Correction. On appeal, he challenges (1) the length of the sentence and (2) the imposition of a sentence of total confinement. After review, we affirm.

Paul Farnsworth, A/K/A Ronnie Bradfield v. Donita Moore,
01623-COA-R3-CV
Trial Court Judge: Thomas W. Graham

State vs. Joshua Webster
E1999-02203-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.
The defendant appeals the trial court's denial of probation or split confinement as the manner of serving his eight-year rape sentence. Because the record supports the trial court's imposition of an incarcerative sentence, we affirm.

State vs. Tony Allen Leonard
E1999-00971-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: R. Jerry Beck
The defendant appeals his conviction for aggravated sexual battery, contending that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction, the trial court erred in allowing hearsay evidence, and the trial court erred in allowing the state to impeach the defendant on cross-examination with a prior felony conviction. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Steve Jackson
E1999-02013-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry Smith
Trial Court Judge: Mary Beth Leibowitz
A Knox County jury convicted the defendant of aggravated burglary. For this offense the trial court sentenced him to twelve years as a Range III, persistent offender. Through the instant appeal the defendant challenges both the validity of his convictions and his sentence. More specifically, he alleges that the evidence is insufficient to support the jury's verdict of guilty; that the trial court did not appropriately carry out its role as the thirteenth juror; that the copies of prior convictions used to enhance his sentence were not properly certified; and that one of these prior convictions from another state should not have been utilized in sentencing because the State failed to prove that the offense would have been a crime in Tennessee. After reviewing the record, we find that these claims lack merit and, therefore, affirm the lower court's actions.

State vs. Susan Renee Whited
E1999-00493-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry Smith
Trial Court Judge: R. Steven Bebb
The Defendant pled guilty to eight counts of theft in Bradley and McMinn Counties. Pursuant to a plea agreement, the Defendant agreed to serve a total of seventeen years in prison and pay restitution in the aggregate amount of $212,284.00. Although the record is silent on the matter, the Defendant was apparently granted parole in 1997 and released. Although not apparent from the record, statements of counsel indicate that the Board of Parolees ordered the Defendant to pay $50.00 per month toward her restitution upon release. On July 30, 1999, the District Attorney General filed an application for garnishment in both counties in order to satisfy the restitution. The trial court temporarily stayed the garnishments pending briefing by both parties, but ultimately issued an order removing the stays in both counties on October 4, 1999. The Defendant appeals that order here. After a careful review of the record, we find that (1) the Defendant has failed to provide an adequate record for our review, (2) Rule 3 of the Tennessee Rule of Appellate Procedure does not authorize an appeal as of right from an order removing a stay of garnishment, and, (3) the court is without jurisdiction to consider the Defendant's claim that her sentence of restitution was void. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

William Boyd vs. State
E1999-01279-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: William H. Inman
The petitioner, William Boyd, appeals from the trial court's denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. Boyd alleges that his eight-year sentence for the offense of especially aggravated sexual exploitation of a minor, which is to be served at 100 percent, is illegal. We agree that the sentence is illegal and therefore reverse the trial court's dismissal of the post-conviction petition, vacate the conviction of especially aggravated sexual exploitation of a minor and the dismissal of the charge of aggravated rape, and remand to the trial court for further proceedings.

State vs. Kimberly Greene
E1999-02200-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.
The defendant appeals from her Blount County Circuit Court conviction and sentence for criminal responsibility for rape of a child, a Class A felony. The trial court sentenced the defendant as a child rapist to 25 years incarceration in the Department of Correction. In this direct appeal, the defendant complains that the videotaped statement she made in response to questioning at the police station should have been suppressed; that the videotaped statement contained inadmissible references to uncharged misconduct; that the cautionary instruction about the evidentiary value of the videotaped statement was inadequate; that her sentence is excessive; and that she should have been sentenced as a Range I, standard offender with a 30 percent release eligibility date. We affirm the defendant's conviction and sentence.

J.D. Hickman v. State of Tennessee
E1999-02756-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Lynn W. Brown

State vs. Tracy L. Fry
E1999-02758-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry Smith
Trial Court Judge: Lynn W. Brown
Tracy Fry, the Defendant and Appellant, pled guilty to driving under the influence, second offense. With the State's and trial court's agreement, however, she specifically reserved the right to appeal a dispositive question of law pursuant to Tenn. R. Crim. P. 37(b)(2)(1). The issue reserved for review is whether Officer Kyte "had reasonable suspicion based on specific and articulable facts, to approach and subsequently seize the defendant leading to the arrest of the defendant." We conclude that the initial encounter between Officer Kyte and the Defendant was not a seizure, that the encounter provided reasonable suspicion sufficient to justify an investigatory detention of the Defendant, and that sufficient probable cause to arrest the Defendant developed during the course of the brief investigatory detention. Thus, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

State vs. Bruce Adams
E2000-00298-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.
The defendant, Bruce Adams, appeals his convictions of resisting arrest and disorderly conduct and the manner of service of his effective six-month sentence. The trial court ordered ten days of confinement and probated the balance of the sentence. The resisting arrest conviction is supported by sufficient evidence, and we affirm that conviction and the sentence, including the confinement term. However, because we find insufficient evidence to support the disorderly conduct conviction, we reverse it and dismiss that charge.

Bobby Lee Tate vs. State
E2000-00796-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Ray L. Jenkins
The petitioner appeals the trial court's denial of his "Motion to Vacate Judgment." Even though we treat the motion as a petition for habeas corpus relief and countenance the appeal via Tennessee Rule of Appellate Procedure 3(b), the record supports the trial court's determination that the factual allegations of improper or invalid judgments are unfounded. Thus, the trial court's denial of the motion or petition is affirmed.

State vs. Charles Arnold Ballinger
E2000-01339-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry Smith
Trial Court Judge: R. Steven Bebb
On October 14, 1998, a Bradley County Grand Jury indicted Charles Ballinger, the defendant and appellant, for statutory rape and contributing to the delinquency of a minor. Following a jury trial, the defendant was convicted on both counts. The court sentenced the defendant to serve two years for statutory rape concurrently with eleven months and twenty-nine days for contributing to the delinquency of a minor. On appeal, the defendant claims (1) that the evidence was insufficient to support a statutory rape conviction, (2) that the trial court should have suppressed a tape recording of a telephone conversation, (3) that the defendant's sentence was excessive, and (4) that the trial court should have instructed the jury to consider mistake of fact as a defense. Because we find that statutory rape requires proof of at least a "recklessness" mens rea and that the trial court should have instructed the jury to consider mistake of fact as a defense to statutory rape, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand this case for a new trial.

State vs. James E. Harman, Jr.
E2000-00437-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry Smith
Trial Court Judge: R. Jerry Beck
In October of 1999, the defendant pled guilty to one count of theft over one-thousand dollars ($1,000.00) and one count of possession of less than .5 ounces of marijuana. His plea form indicated that he agreed to receive concurrent sentences of five and one-half years as a Range II, multiple offender for the former offense and eleven months and twenty-nine days for the latter. Subsequently, the trial court conducted a hearing to determine the manner in which these sentences were to be served. At the conclusion of such hearing, the trial court denied the defendant any form of alternative sentencing, and it is this denial that the defendant contests through his appeal. However, after having reviewed the record and applicable authorities, we find this contention to be without merit and, therefore, affirm the trial court's sentence.

State vs. James E. Harman, Jr.
E2000-00437-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry Smith
Trial Court Judge: R. Jerry Beck

In October of 1999, the defendant pled guilty to one count of theft over one-thousand dollars ($1,000.00) and one count of possession of less than .5 ounces of marijuana. His plea form indicated that he agreed to receive concurrent sentences of five and one-half years as a Range II, multiple offender for the former offense and eleven months and twenty-nine days for the latter. Subsequently, the trial court conducted a hearing to determine the manner in which these sentences were to be served. At the conclusion of such hearing, the trial court denied the defendant any form of alternative sentencing, and it is this denial that the defendant contests through his appeal. However, after having reviewed the record and applicable authorities, we find this contention to be without merit and, therefore, affirm the trial court's sentence.