State of Tennessee v. Daniel Andrew Decker - Dissenting

Case Number
E2003-00922-CCA-R10-CD

I respectfully dissent. I do not believe the record justifies removing counsel from representing the defendant. I see no design or scheme in place by which Ms. Gothard sought to thwart justice or its proper administration. Nor do I view the case as one by which she made material misrepresentations or disobeyed trial court orders. Rather, I find material discrepancies between the trial court’s findings, upon which the majority opinion is based, and the transcript of trial court proceedings. For example, the majority opinion specifies counsel’s failing to comply with the trial court’s “directive” to have her expert witness in court to support her request for a continuance.  However, the trial court did not order counsel to produce the expert nor did counsel defy any such order.

Authoring Judge
Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Originating Judge
Judge Rebecca J. Stern
Case Name
State of Tennessee v. Daniel Andrew Decker - Dissenting
Date Filed
Dissent or Concur
This is a dissenting opinion
Download PDF Version
deckerD.pdf21.89 KB