APPELLATE COURT OPINIONS

The defendant, Teresa Gail Presson, appeals from the Dickson County Circuit Court's order revoking her probation that she received upon her guilty plea to theft of property valued more than $10,000 but less than $60,000. The defendant contends that although she violated her probation, the trial court erred by ordering her to serve the remainder of her sentence in confinement. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The Appellant, Frank Crittenden, appeals the Davidson County Criminal Court's dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. Crittenden pled guilty to eight counts of aggravated rape and, following a sentencing hearing, received an effective one-hundred-year sentence in the Department of Correction. On appeal, the single issue presented for our review is whether Crittenden was denied the effective assistance of counsel. Following a review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court dismissing the petition.

A Hamilton County jury convicted the Petitioner, Michael Anderson Peek, of four counts of aggravated rape, one count of attempted aggravated rape, three counts of rape, one count of aggravated robbery, two counts of robbery, and three counts of aggravated burglary. The trial court imposed an effective sentence of ninety-nine years in prison. On direct appeal, this Court affirmed the convictions, and the Tennessee Supreme Court denied the Petitioner's application for permission to appeal. The Petitioner then sought post-conviction relief, alleging that he was denied effective assistance of counsel. Following a hearing on the post-conviction petition, the trial court dismissed the petition, and this appeal ensued. We affirm the trial court's dismissal of the petition.

The defendant entered a best interest plea to theft over $10,000, as a Range I, standard offender. She was sentenced to six years, with eight months of confinement and the remainder suspended with ten years of intensive probation. Restitution was included. On appeal of her sentence, the sentence was modified to three years and the remaining terms of the sentence affirmed in all respects.

The Appellant, William O. Ewerling, appeals his conviction by a Davidson County jury for driving under the influence of an intoxicant (DUI), first offense. On appeal, Ewerling raises three issues for our review: (1) whether the trial court's admission of certain evidence at trial was error; (2) whether the evidence was sufficient to support his conviction; and (3) whether Ewerling's refusal to submit to a breath alcohol test was protected by his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination. Because the record on appeal fails to include either a transcript of the evidence from Ewerling's trial or a statement of the evidence as permitted by Tenn. R. App. P. 24, we find that these issues are procedurally defaulted. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

The Defendant, Ira Miles, brings this appeal from the trial court’s denial of post-conviction relief. The Defendant pled guilty to especially aggravated robbery and received an agreed sentence of seventeen years to be served at one hundred percent. In this appeal, he argues that he is entitled to post-conviction relief because he was denied the effective assistance of counsel during the course of his plea. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The appellant, Kevin D. Guffey, pled guilty in the Hamilton County Criminal Court to driving under the influence (DUI), a Class A misdemeanor. The trial court sentenced the appellant to eleven months and twenty-nine days in the county workhouse, to be suspended after serving forty-eight hours, and imposed a fine in the amount of three hundred sixty dollars ($360). The trial court also suspended the appellant's driver's license for one year and ordered the appellant to attend "DUI school." Pursuant to the plea agreement, the appellant reserved the right to appeal a certified question of law challenging the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The defendant pled guilty to three counts of aggravated assault, two counts of solicitation of a minor, four counts of indecent exposure, and possession of a dangerous weapon. He agreed to an effective five-year sentence, with the manner of service to be determined by the trial court. The defendant contends that the trial court erred in denying him an alternative sentence. We affirm the judgments of the trial court.

The Defendant, Richard Rehagen, pled guilty to one count of first degree murder, one count of attempted first degree murder, and one count of aggravated arson. He was sentenced to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for the murder, and to twenty-five years for each of the other two offenses, to run concurrently. The Defendant subsequently challenged his pleas by filing a petition for post-conviction relief. The trial court denied the Defendant’s petition after an evidentiary hearing, and the Defendant now appeals. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The petitioner, Nadia Coffer, appeals the lower court’s denial of her post-conviction relief petition. The petitioner originally entered guilty pleas in the Shelby County Criminal Court to especially aggravated kidnapping and attempted first degree murder and received two concurrent fifteen-year sentences, the minimum sentences for these Class A felonies. On appeal, the petitioner contends her pleas were unknowingly and involuntarily entered due to ineffective assistance of counsel. We affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

The jury convicted the defendant of especially aggravated robbery and theft over $10,000. The trial court imposed consecutive twenty-five-year and ten-year sentences, respectively. On appeal, the defendant argues: (1) there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction for especially aggravated robbery; (2) the trial court erred in not allowing him to move from the defense table to view evidence on a monitor; and (3) the trial court erred in sentencing him. We affirm the judgments of the trial court.