APPELLATE COURT OPINIONS

The petitioner, Steven DeWayne Bolden, appeals the dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief by the Lake County Circuit Court on March 26, 1999. Following a review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

The petitioner, Carlous Coman, appeals from the Madison County Circuit Court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief. On April 19, 1997, the petitioner was convicted by a Madison County jury of second degree murder. For this offense, the defendant, a Range I offender, was sentenced to twenty years in the Department of Correction. On February 17, 1999, he filed a post-conviction petition alleging ineffective assistance of counsel at trial and upon appeal. The trial court denied this petition after a hearing. After careful review, we AFFIRM the order of the trial court denying the petition.

On December 11, 1998, the defendant, Patricia Spencer, pled guilty to one count of second degree murder and one count of attempted especially aggravated robbery. The trial court sentenced her as a Range I Violent Offender to 25 years for the second degree murder and as a Range I Standard Offender to 8 years for the attempted especially aggravated robbery, the sentences to be served concurrently. From this sentencing, the defendant now appeals asserting that the trial court erred in its 25-year sentence for the second degree murder; accordingly, she requests that her sentence be reduced. After careful review, we AFFIRM the sentence as imposed by the trial court.

The defendant, Christopher Walls, appeals from the denial of his motion for reduction of sentence by the Criminal Court of Morgan County. The defendant pleaded guilty to escape, a Class E felony, Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-16-601 (1997), and theft of property valued over $1000, a Class D felony, Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-14-103 (1997). In accordance with his plea agreement, the trial court sentenced the defendant to serve his bargained-for sentence of three years in the Department of Correction. In his appeal, he complains that the trial court erred in failing to grant his motion to reduce his sentence. Following a review of the record and the briefs of the parties, we affirm the trial court's judgment.

Defendant, Tim D. Smith, was found guilty by a Shelby County jury of automobile burglary, a Class E felony, and was sentenced by the trial court to six years as a career offender. The sole issue in this appeal as of right is whether the evidence is sufficient to support the guilty verdict. After a careful review of the record, we conclude the evidence is indeed sufficient to support the verdict.  Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

The defendant, William Padilla, appeals from his Haywood County jury conviction of one count of rape of a child. The defendant received 25 years, the maximum sentence for a Range I standard offender. He appeals this conviction and sentence, arguing that:

(1) The evidence was insufficient to support the jury’s verdict; and

(2) the sentence was excessive.

After careful review, we AFFIRM the judgment and sentence from the trial court

The defendant, Marco Boyd, pled guilty to two counts of reckless endangerment, Class E felonies. In his negotiated plea, he agreed to a fine of $500 on each count and two one-year concurrent sentences. The manner of service of the sentences was reserved for a later hearing. At the hearing, the trial court denied the defendant probation, and from that decision the defendant now appeals. After careful review, we AFFIRM the judgment from the trial court.

The petitioner, James Webb, appeals as of right from the trial court’s order summarily dismissing his pro se petition for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing. We REVERSE the judgment of the trial court and REMAND for appointment of counsel and review of petitioner’s claims.

On April 28, 1997, the appellant, Michael Gerard Coppola, pled guilty in the Benton County Circuit Court to an array of offenses. The plea agreement provided for an effective six-year sentence with the Tennessee Department of Correction (T.D.O.C.) and payment of $3,363.10 of restitution to various victims. In March 1998, appellant completed boot camp and T.D.O.C. released him to probation, the terms of which required payment of the previously ordered restitution. The sole issue on appeal is the trial court’s revocation of probation for failure to pay restitution. Based upon our conclusion that no probation violation occurred, we REVERSE and REMAND to the trial court.

A Shelby County jury found defendant guilty of aggravated robbery, a Class B felony. Defendant received an eight-year sentence. In this appeal as of right, defendant claims (1) the evidence was not sufficient to sustain the conviction for aggravated robbery, and (2) he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Upon our review of the record, we conclude the evidence was sufficient to sustain defendant's conviction, and defendant received effective assistance of counsel. Thus, we AFFIRM the judgment of the trial court.

The appellant, Byron A. Peete, appeals his conviction in the Shelby County Criminal Court of second degree murder. Pursuant to the appellant’s conviction, the trial court sentenced the appellant to thirteen years and six months incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence underlying his conviction. Although not clearly articulated, his argument appears to encompass the following specific contentions: (1) the evidence presented at trial concerning his low intellectual quotient (I.Q.) precluded a finding that the killing was knowing as required by Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-210(a)(1) (1997); (2) alternatively, in light of the evidence concerning the appellant’s low I.Q., the record demonstrates the provocation required by Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-211(a) (1997); or (3) in light of the evidence concerning his low I.Q., the record demonstrates that the appellant killed the victim, Terrance Baker, in self-defense within the meaning of Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-11-611(a) (1997). Following a thorough review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.