APPELLATE COURT OPINIONS

The Defendant, Richard Ellis Stapleton, was convicted on his guilty pleas of attempted especially aggravated robbery, a Class B felony; especially aggravated burglary, a Class B felony; and two counts of facilitation of especially aggravated kidnapping, a Class B felony. The trial court imposed concurrent, Range I, twelve-year sentences to be served in the Department of Correction. In this appeal, the Defendant challenges the length of the sentences. We modify the sentences for attempted especially aggravated robbery and especially aggravated burglary to eleven years each and modify the sentences for facilitation of especially aggravated kidnapping to nine years each.

The Defendant-Appellant, Tarik Robertson, was convicted by a Shelby County jury of observation without consent, a Class A misdemeanor. He received the maximum sentence of eleven months and twenty-nine days, with four months to be served in a county workhouse. On appeal, he claims: (1) the insufficiency of the evidence; (2) the trial court did not properly exercise its role as the thirteenth juror; (3) the State committed prosecutorial misconduct in its closing argument; and (4) the trial court erred in imposing both the length and manner of his sentence. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Petitioner, Vincent Roger Harris, appeals the dismissal of his post-conviction petition in which Petitioner alleged that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance of counsel in connection with the entry of his pleas of guilty, and that his guilty pleas were not voluntarily or knowingly entered. After a thorough review we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

The petitioner, George R. Croft, appeals the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. The petitioner was found guilty of especially aggravated robbery and felony murder in the perpetration of a robbery. He was sentenced as a Range I, violent offender to life imprisonment for the felony murder conviction and to twenty-two years for the especially aggravated robbery conviction. On appeal, he contends that his counsel were ineffective and that he should be granted a new trial because trial counsel did not conduct voir dire pursuant to Momon v. State, 18 S.W.3d 152 (Tenn. 1999), with regard to his desire to testify at trial. After careful review, we affirm the judgment from the post-conviction court.

The petitioner, Darrell Walls, appeals the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief and argues that counsel was ineffective for failing to adequately investigate his case. The petitioner entered a best interest plea to voluntary manslaughter, a Class C felony, and aggravated assault, a Class C felony. He was sentenced as a Range II, multiple offender to eight years in confinement. After careful review, we affirm the denial of post-conviction relief by the post-conviction court.

Appellant, Rader Bonding Company, Inc., appeals the judgment of the Davidson County Criminal Court ordering complete forfeiture of the bail bond in the case of Defendant, Addirizak Omar Yussuf. Appellant argues that the State’s refusal to seek extradition of Defendant, who had fled to Sweden, constituted an extreme case under State v. Frankgos, 114 Tenn. 76, 85 S.W. 79, 80-81 (Tenn. 1905) which relieved Appellant of its responsibility under the bond agreement. Following a review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Following a jury trial, Defendant, Timothy Tylus Sorrells, was convicted of first degree premeditated murder and abuse of a corpse. Defendant was sentenced to life imprisonment with the possibility of parole for his murder conviction and one year as a Range I offender for abuse of a corpse, to be served concurrently. On appeal, Defendant argues that the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions. Following our review of the record, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

The defendant, Christopher R. Rickman, was convicted by a McNairy County jury of theft of property greater than $1000, a Class D felony, and possession of drug paraphernalia, a Class A misdemeanor. He was subsequently sentenced to concurrent sentences of three years, to be suspended following service of ninety days, and eleven months and twenty-nine days. On appeal, the defendant raises two issues for our review: (1) whether the evidence presented was sufficient to support the convictions; and (2) whether the trial court erred in denying a sentence of full probation. Following review of the record, we find no error and affirm the convictions and resulting sentences.

The defendant, Jonathan Scott Lemay, entered best interest pleas to robbery and aggravated assault, Class C felonies, in Sullivan County Criminal Court. The trial court imposed two concurrent five- year sentences to be served in the custody of the Department of Correction. In this appeal as of right, the defendant contends that the trial court erred in denying him alternative sentencing and by imposing sentences beyond the statutory minimum. Following our review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

The Petitioner, Patrick Harris, was convicted by a jury of one count of first degree murder. His conviction was affirmed on direct appeal. See State v. Patrick Harris, No. W2004-00469-CCA-R3-CD, 2005 WL 468324 (Tenn. Crim. App., Jackson, Feb. 25, 2005). He filed a timely petition for post-conviction relief. He was appointed counsel and filed an amended petition alleging that he received ineffective assistance of counsel at trial. The Criminal Court of Shelby County denied his petition for post-conviction relief after two evidentiary hearings. He now appeals this denial. We affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

The defendant, Lontrell Williams, appeals the revocation of his probation, arguing that the trial court applied an incorrect legal standard when finding that he had violated the terms of his probation. He, therefore, requests that this court remand for a new probation revocation hearing. The State concedes that the trial court applied an incorrect standard and joins in the defendant’s request for a new revocation hearing under the appropriate standard. We agree that the trial court erroneously based the revocation of the defendant’s probation on a probable cause, rather than a preponderance of the evidence, standard. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand the case for a new probation revocation hearing.

The defendant, Demario Johnson, a.k.a. Leo Scott, was convicted of first degree (premeditated) murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. On appeal, he argues that: the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions; the trial court improperly responded to a juror’s question; and the trial court erred in admitting photographs into evidence. After careful review, we affirm the judgment from the trial court.

The Defendant, Delarie Katrice Purnell, pled guilty to sale and delivery of a Schedule VI controlled substance (counts 1 and 2), sale and delivery of a Schedule II controlled substance (counts 3 and 4), sale and delivery of a Schedule I controlled substance (counts 5 and 6), speeding (count 7), and simple possession of a Schedule VI controlled substance (count 8). At the sentencing hearing, the trial court denied alternative sentencing. The Defendant appeals, arguing that her sentence is excessive and contrary to law. Citing the Defendant’s previous criminal convictions and criminal conduct, the court ordered the Defendant to serve an effective sentence of ten years as a Range I Standard Offender. After reviewing the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The pro se Defendant, Anthony Christopher Brown, appeals as of right from his convictions for possession of less than .5 grams of cocaine, a Class C felony, and possession of drug paraphernalia, a Class A misdemeanor, arising from his bench trial in Davidson County Criminal Court. He received an effective sentence of three years as a Range I, standard offender. The Defendant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions. Following our review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

The Petitioner, Ronnie Jackson, Jr., pleaded guilty to one count of aggravated robbery and two counts of aggravated assault. As part of his plea agreement, he was sentenced as a Range I, standard offender to eight years for his aggravated robbery conviction and three years for each of his aggravated assault convictions, those sentences to be served concurrently in the Department of Correction. He now appeals from the Shelby County Criminal Court’s order denying post-conviction relief, contending that this denial was error because he received the ineffective assistance of counsel and, consequently, entered his pleas involuntarily and unknowingly. Specifically, he contends that trial counsel failed to properly investigate his case and prepare a defense strategy, that trial counsel pressured him into pleading guilty, and that by entering an Alford1 plea, he believed he could continue to challenge pre-trial constitutional issues. Following our review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

The petitioner, Marquis Day, appeals from the post-conviction court's denial of post-conviction relief, as it relates to the petitioner’s convictions of first-degree murder, conspiracy to commit firstdegree murder, fabricating evidence, and the unlawful possession of a weapon. On appeal from the judgment of the post-conviction court, the petitioner asserts that he received the ineffective assistance of counsel at trial and on direct appeal. Following our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court denying post-conviction relief.

The Defendant, Antoine Gray, aka Antoine Devin West, challenges the sentencing decision of the Montgomery County Circuit Court. Following his guilty pleas to possession of less than .5 grams of cocaine with the intent to sell, aggravated assault, and misdemeanor evading arrest, the trial court imposed an effective five-year sentence to be served in the Department of Correction. On appeal, the Defendant asserts that his sentence is excessive. After a review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The petitioner, Jimmy Lee Taylor, Jr., appeals from the Lauderdale County Circuit Court’s denial of post-conviction relief from his guilty pleas to aggravated rape, aggravated robbery, especially aggravated kidnapping, and especially aggravated burglary and his effective sentence of seventeen years at one hundred percent. In his appeal, the petitioner argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel because trial counsel failed to explain the consequences of his plea and because trial counsel did not spend adequate time meeting with him. Upon review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

A Madison County Circuit Court jury convicted the defendant, Lamar Jermaine Thomas, of possession with the intent to sell more than .5 grams of cocaine, a Class B felony; possession with the intent to sell morphine, a Class C felony; possession with the intent to sell dihydrocodeinone, a Class D felony; possession with the intent to sell more than one-half once of marijuana, a Class E felony; and possession of drug paraphernalia, a Class A misdemeanor. He was subsequently given an effective sentence of fourteen years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the defendant asserts that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury’s verdicts of guilt. Upon review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

The defendants, Jason Scott Lomax and Ophelia Lomax, were each convicted of aggravated child abuse by causing serious bodily injury and aggravated child abuse by neglect or endangering a child. These offenses were merged and each defendant was sentenced to serve eight years in the Tennessee Department of Correction at 100 percent. On appeal, the only issue raised by the defendants is whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain their convictions for aggravated child abuse by causing serious bodily injury. Following a review of the parties’ briefs, the record, and applicable law, we affirm the defendants’ convictions.

At the conclusion of a jury trial, Appellant was convicted of DUI, third offense. The trial court sentenced Appellant to eleven months and twenty-nine days with all but 120 days suspended. The rest of the sentence was to be served on supervised probation. On appeal, Appellant argues that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction of DUI and that the trial court erred in neglecting to give the Allen or dynamite charge when the jury was unable to reach a verdict. We conclude that the evidence was sufficient and that the use of the Allen or dynamite charge is no longer approved of by our supreme court. Therefore, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

The petitioner, Darrell Jennings, was found guilty by a Shelby County jury of second degree murder and felony murder. The trial court merged the convictions, and the petitioner received a life sentence. Thereafter, the petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief, alleging that his trial counsel was ineffective. The post-conviction court denied the petition, and the petitioner now appeals. Upon our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the postconviction court.

The Defendant, Anthony T. Dean, appeals from an order of the trial court denying his motion for reduction of sentence. Following our review of the record, we conclude that the trial court did not err by denying the motion. We affirm the order of the trial court in accordance with Rule 20 of the Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee.

The defendant, Damion Seals, pled guilty to aggravated assault, a Class C felony, and was sentenced to five years as a Range I offender in the Department of Correction. On appeal, he challenges the sentence imposed by the trial court. After review, we affirm the sentencing decision of the trial court.