State of Tennessee v. Ernest Edward Wilson - Concurring and Dissenting

Case Number
M2000-01997-CCA-R3-CD

Although I agree with Judge Welles that it is problematic to use voluntary
manslaughter as the intermediate offense for the purposes of applying the Williams harmless error rule, I concur with Judge Riley in affirming the conviction, based on the facts of the present case and the defendant’s use of those facts in formulating a theory of defense. Given the facts, the defendant’s theory of defense, and the jury’s verdict of second-degree murder, I conclude that the failure to charge the included offenses lesser than voluntary manslaughter was harmless error.

Authoring Judge
Judge James Curwood Witt, Jr.
Case Name
State of Tennessee v. Ernest Edward Wilson - Concurring and Dissenting
Date Filed
Dissent or Concur
This is a dissenting opinion
Download PDF Version