State of Tennessee v. Sherman Dunlap - Concurring

Case Number
M1999-00325-CCA-R3-CD

While I concur fully in the judgment of the Court denying the appellant full probation, I do so because the record reflects the appellant has received probation for a number of previous offenses, but has yet to be rehabilitated. Thus, “measures less restrictive than confinement have frequently or recently been applied unsuccessfully to the [appellant].” See Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 40-35-103(c).  This reason alone amply justifies the denial of probation in this case.

Authoring Judge
Judge Jerry L. Smith
Originating Judge
John W. Rollins
Case Name
State of Tennessee v. Sherman Dunlap - Concurring
Date Filed
Dissent or Concur
This is a dissenting opinion
Download PDF Version