APPELLATE COURT OPINIONS

Petitioner, Michael Tyrone Gordon, has appealed from the trial court’s dismissal of the pleading he designated as a “Motion to Correct Illegal Sentence,” and which the trial court treated as a petition for writ of habeas corpus. The State has filed a motion for this Court to affirm the judgment by Memorandum Opinion pursuant to Rule 20 of the Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee. Upon review of Petitioner’s brief, the State’s motion and the entire record, we grant the State’s motion and affirm the judgment of the trial court.

A Lawrence County Circuit Court Jury convicted the appellant, William Keith Blackburn, of first degree premeditated murder and especially aggravated robbery. The trial court imposed an effective life sentence. On appeal, the appellant raises the following issues for review: 1. Whether the evidence is sufficient to support the appellant’s convictions; 2. Whether the trial court erred in refusing to grant a mistrial after a detective testified that the appellant exercised his right to remain silent and refused to give police a statement; 3. Whether the trial court erred in admitting, or in the alternative not redacting, an audio tape recording of telephone calls the appellant made while in jail; 4. Whether the trial court erred by instructing the jury on flight and attempting to conceal or suppress evidence; 5. Whether the court reporter’s failure to provide a complete transcript denied the appellant a full and complete appellate review; and 6. Whether the cumulative errors require a new trial. Upon review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

A Davidson County Criminal Court jury convicted the defendant, Carl J. Wagner, of second degree murder, see T.C.A. § 39-13-210 (2006); first degree murder committed in the perpetration of an aggravated robbery, see id. § 39-13-202(a)(2); and especially aggravated robbery, see id. § 39-13-403. The trial court imposed concurrent sentences of 22 years’ incarceration, life imprisonment, and 22 years’ incarceration, respectively, and merged the conviction of second degree murder into the conviction of first degree murder. On appeal, the defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his convictions. We determine that there is insufficient evidence to support the defendant’s convictions of first degree murder committed in the perpetration of an aggravated robbery and especially aggravated robbery. We also determine, however, that there is sufficient evidence to support the defendant’s conviction of second degree murder. Accordingly, we affirm the defendant’s conviction in count one and remand that count for resentencing, and we reverse and dismiss the charges in counts two and three.

Teacher who received a reprimand brought this action to challenge the actions of school officials and the school board. She argues that the school failed to provide due process to her and defamed her. The trial court found in favor of the defendants, and we affirm.

A Madison County jury convicted the defendant, Gregory D. Douglas, of second degree murder, a Class A felony. The trial court sentenced him as a Range I, violent offender to twenty-five years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the defendant argues that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction and that his sentence was excessive. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The petitioner, David Earl Offut, appeals from the Rutherford County Circuit Court’s denial of his petition for post-conviction relief attacking his guilty-pleaded convictions for three counts of incest for which he is serving an effective sentence of 18 years’ incarceration as a Range I, standard offender. He contends that his guilty pleas were entered involuntarily and unknowingly because trial counsel failed to adequately advise him regarding his release eligibility. Discerning no error, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

This is an appeal from the trial court's grant of summary judgment to the Appellee. After reviewing the record, we conclude that the order granting summary judgment fails to comply with Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 56.04, as it does not “state the legal grounds upon which the court denies or grants the motion.” Consequently, this Court cannot proceed with our review and must vacate the judgment of the trial court. Vacated and remanded.

A Shelby County Criminal Court jury convicted the defendant, Stanley Butler, of three counts of aggravated assault, see T.C.A. § 39-13-102(a)(1)(B)(2006), for which he received a total effective sentence of five years to be served on split confinement consisting of 12 months’ confinement in the local workhouse followed by probation. On appeal, the defendant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction for aggravated assault only in count two. Discerning no infirmity in the evidence, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

The petitioner, Kerry Chearis, appeals the summary dismissal of his petition for writ of habeas corpus, alleging that his convictions are void. Discerning no error, we affirm.

A Davidson County Criminal Court jury convicted the defendant, William Lamont Green, of second degree murder, and the trial court imposed a sentence of 23 years’ incarceration. In this appeal, the defendant challenges the sufficiency of the convicting evidence. Finding no deficiency in the proof, we affirm.

This appeal involves a claim under Tennessee’s False Claims Act. A local vendor of termite control services became suspicious that two of its competitors had overbilled Knox County for termite control services provided to Knox County’s public schools. After confirming its suspicions by obtaining and reviewing public records and by hiring an attorney and private investigator, the vendor presented a detailed report of its findings to county officials who were unaware that the overbilling had occurred. When the County delayed taking remedial action, the vendor filed a qui tam suit authorized by Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-18-104(c) (2005) in the Chancery Court for Knox County. The County joined the vendor’s lawsuit and eventually settled with both of the companies named as defendants in the vendor’s lawsuit. When the qui tam plaintiff sought a share of the County’s settlement with one of the defendants, the County asserted that the qui tam plaintiff was not eligible to receive any of the settlement proceeds. The trial court heard the matter without a jury and held that the qui tam plaintiff was an “original source” for the purpose of Tenn. Code Ann. § 4-18-104(d)(3)(A) and, therefore, was entitled to receive 28% of the settlement proceeds or $71,546.46. The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court’s conclusion that the qui tam plaintiff was entitled to recover 28% of the value of the settlement proceeds but remanded the case for the purpose of redetermining the value of the settlement proceeds. In re Knox Cnty., Tenn. ex rel. Envtl. Termite & Pest Control, Inc., No. E2007-02827-COA-R3-CV, 2009 WL 2144478 (Tenn. Ct. App. July 20, 2009). The County filed a Tenn. R. App. P. 11 application on the sole issue of whether the qui tam plaintiff is eligible to recover a portion of the settlement proceeds. We affirm the decisions of both the trial court and the Court of Appeals that the qui tam plaintiff is an “original source” and, therefore, is eligible to receive a portion of the proceeds from the County’s settlement with one of the vendors.

The Petitioner, Andre Baldwin, appeals the Shelby County Criminal Court’s denial of post-conviction relief from his conviction for first degree murder, for which he is serving a life sentence. The Petitioner contends that he did not receive the effective assistance of counsel. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The Defendant, Paul Edward Corso, Jr., was convicted by a Davidson County Criminal Court jury of felony murder; second degree murder, a Class A felony; aggravated robbery, a Class B felony; and theft of property over $10,000 but less than $60,000, a Class C felony. See T.C.A. §§ 39-13-202, 39-13-210, 39-13-402, 39-14-103 (2010). The trial court merged the convictions for felony murder and second degree murder and sentenced the Defendant to life for felony murder, to eight years’ incarceration for aggravated robbery, and to two years’ incarceration for theft, to be served concurrently. On appeal, he contends that the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions and that the trial court erred by denying his motion for a mistrial after the State asked his wife during cross-examination how often she visited the Defendant in jail. We affirm the judgments of the trial court.

A Madison County Circuit Court jury convicted the appellant, Reginold Steed, of aggravated assault, and the trial court imposed a sentence of four years and six months in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence underlying his conviction, the length of the sentence imposed by the trial court, and the trial court’s denial of judicial diversion and alternative sentencing. Upon review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The Petitioner, Derrick Sutton, appeals as of right from the Shelby County Criminal Court’s denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. The Petitioner was convicted of especially aggravated robbery and sentenced as a violent offender to 21 years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The Petitioner contends that the trial court erred in failing to charge facilitation of especially aggravated robbery as a lesser-included offense and that the trial court erred in defining the term knowingly in response to a question from the jury. The Petitioner also challenges the performance of trial and appellate counsel. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

Former wife appeals the dismissal of an order of protection she had secured against her husband; the failure of trial court to hear her petition for annulment of the marriage; and the failure of trial court to state specifically the facts upon which the court’s finding of husband’s improper marital conduct was based. Finding no error, we affirm the trial court in all respects.

The petitioner, Benjamin Wheeler Word, pleaded guilty to underage consumption. The trial court sentenced him to serve eleven months and twenty-nine days in jail but suspended the petitioner’s sentence to probation. The petitioner filed a petition for post conviction relief, which the post-conviction court denied. The petitioner appeals the denial of post-conviction relief arguing that (1) his conviction is unconstitutional; (2) the conduct with which he was charged was not an offense; (3) his conviction is void because it denied him expungement of his record; and (4) his sentence violated the jurisdictional limits of the court. After a thorough review of the parties’ briefs, the record, and the applicable law, we reverse the judgment of the post-conviction court and grant post-conviction relief.

The appellant, Alonzo Thomas, pled guilty to attempted aggravated sexual battery and was sentenced to four years and six months in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the appellant challenges the trial court’s denial of probation. Upon review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Following a jury trial, the Defendants, Candance Orrand Bush and Gary W. Bush, were convicted of first-degree murder, a Class X felony, for the 1982 killing of Lynn Orrand. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-2-202 (1982). Both Defendants were sentenced to imprisonment for life. In this appeal as of right, the Defendants raise the following issues: (1) Defendant Orrand contends that the trial court erred in failing to disqualify District Attorney General William C. Whitesell, Jr. and his office from prosecuting this case; (2) Defendant Bush contends that the trial court erred by admitting into evidence a tape recording of a phone call between Defendant Bush and Jason Riley; (3) both Defendants contend that the evidence was insufficient to sustain their convictions because it was based upon the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice, Kevin Patterson; and (4) Defendant Bush contends that the trial court erred by failing to select the alternate jurors “in plain view.” Following our review, we conclude that these issues have no merit and affirm the judgments of the trial court.

A Shelby County Criminal Court jury convicted the appellants, Michael Harris and Eddie Harris, of aggravated robbery, and the trial court sentenced them to nine years in confinement. On appeal, they contend that the evidence is insufficient to support their convictions. Based upon the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

This case is before this court upon the Tennessee Supreme Court’s remand for further consideration in light of its opinion in State v. Dorantes (Dorantes II), 331 S.W.3d 370 (Tenn. 2011). A Davidson County jury convicted the defendant, Martha Patlan, of aggravated child abuse, a Class A felony, and first degree felony murder during the perpetration of aggravated child abuse. The trial court sentenced the defendant to a mandatory sentence of life imprisonment for the murder conviction and, consecutive to the life sentence, twenty years for the aggravated child abuse conviction both to be served in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the defendant argued that (1) the evidence was insufficient to convict her of aggravated child abuse and felony murder; (2) her felony murder conviction is unconstitutional; (3) the trial court erred when it failed to require the state to elect an incident of neglect; (4) the trial court erred when it refused to allow testimony regarding bruises on the defendant’s face; (5) the trial court erred when it allowed certain photographs into evidence; (6) the trial court erred in overruling the defendant’s objection to the use of the term Battered Child Syndrome; and (7) the trial court erred by ordering that the defendant serve her sentences consecutively. This court affirmed the defendant’s convictions and sentences. Upon review, we again conclude that the evidence was sufficient to support the defendant’s convictions and that the defendant’s sentence is proper. Accordingly, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

The appellant, Allyn Hood, is the owner of A-Hood Bonding Company and appeals the trial court’s denial of a motion to add his son, Daniel Hood, as a bail bond agent in the Second Judicial District. After our de novo review, we conclude that Daniel Hood meets all the statutory requirements to act as a bail bond agent. Therefore, the trial court’s decision to deny Daniel Hood’s application as a bail bond agent is reversed, and this case is remanded to the trial court with instructions to add Daniel Hood as a bail bond agent in the Second Judicial District.

Pursuant to Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 51, this workers’ compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers’ Compensation Appeals Panel for a hearing and a report of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The issue presented in this case is whether the employee’s request for a benefit review conference was filed more than one year after the employee had knowledge that his occupational disease was caused by his employment. The trial court ruled that the employee’s request was not timely and dismissed the case. After careful review, we hold that the evidence does not preponderate against the trial court’s finding that Employee had knowledge that his illness was related to his employment more than one year before the filing of his request for a benefit review conference. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

A Sevier County Circuit Court jury convicted the defendant, David A. Taylor, of aggravated rape of a child, see T.C.A. § 39-13-531(a) (2006), and the trial court imposed a sentence of 60 years’ incarceration to be served at 100 percent by operation of law, see id. § 40-35-501(i)(2)(L). In this appeal, the defendant challenges the trial court’s denial of the motion to suppress his pretrial statement to police, the admission of hearsay statements of the victim, the sufficiency of the convicting evidence, and the sentence imposed by the trial court. Discerning no error, we affirm.

The defendant, Timothy L. Diggs, Sr., stands convicted of aggravated child abuse of a child under eight years old, a Class A felony, and felony murder. The trial court sentenced him as a violent offender to serve fifteen years for aggravated child abuse concurrently with a life sentence for felony murder in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his convictions. Following our review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court, but we remand for a corrected judgment form for the felony murder conviction to properly reflect the defendant’s life sentence.