State of Tennessee v. Antonius Harris - Concurring

Case Number
W2001-02617-CCA-R3-CD
I concur with the majority opinion, save one aspect. I disagree with its implication that Rule 8(a), Tenn. R. Crim. P., has no bearing on superseding indictments. Rule 8(a) mandates that offenses arising from the same conduct or criminal episode be joined in the same indictment, if the offenses are known to the prosecutor at the time of indictment. The Committee Comment states: The Commission wishes to make clear that section (a) is meant to stop the practice by some prosecuting attorneys of “saving back” one or more charges arising from the same conduct or from the same criminal episode. Such other charges are barred from future prosecution if known to the appropriate prosecuting official at the time that the other prosecution is commenced, but deliberately not presented to a grand jury.
Authoring Judge
Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Originating Judge
Judge L. Terry Lafferty
Case Name
State of Tennessee v. Antonius Harris - Concurring
Date Filed
Dissent or Concur
No
Download PDF Version