Donald W. Rhea, Jr. v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Donald W. Rhea, Jr., pled guilty in the Davidson County Criminal Court to robbery and attempted robbery and received a nine-year sentence. Subsequently, the petitioner filed for habeas corpus relief in the Wayne County Circuit Court, alleging that his sentence was illegal and that the indictments underlying his conviction were fatally defective. The trial court dismissed the habeas corpus petition and the petitioner timely appealed. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Wayne | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Jeffery A. Pack
The defendant appeals his conviction for false reporting on the basis of insufficient evidence to support the verdict. After review, we conclude the evidence to be sufficient to support the conviction and affirm the judgment from the trial court. |
Dickson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
William Romero Padilla v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, William Romero Padilla, was convicted in the Haywood County Circuit Court of rape of a child and was sentenced to twenty-five years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. Subsequently, he filed for post-conviction relief, alleging that counsel was ineffective and that “fundamental fairness” dictated that a different prosecutor should have represented the State at trial. After an evidentiary hearing, the post-conviction court dismissed the petition, and the petitioner appealed. Upon our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Haywood | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Tracy Lynnette Glenn v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner originally entered an open guilty plea to aggravated robbery and child neglect and |
Gibson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. William Herbert Stitts
The appellant, William Herbert Stitts, was convicted by a jury in the Madison County Circuit Court of two counts of robbery, Class C felonies. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced the appellant on each count as a Range II multiple offender to ten years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction, to be served consecutively to one another and consecutively to sentences for previous, unrelated convictions. On appeal, the appellant asserts that (1) the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction of robbery as charged in count one of the indictment, and (2) the sentence imposed by the trial court was excessive. Upon review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. David G. Housler
This court granted the State of Tennessee's application for an appeal pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Appellate Procedure 10. The State is seeking reversal of the order of the Montgomery County Circuit Court which supplemented the appellate record in the defendant's direct appeal with the transcript of the trial in the case of State v. Courtney Matthews, Montgomery County Circuit Court No. 33791. Although Housler and Matthews were both charged in the homicides of four Taco Bell employees in Clarksville, Tennessee, the pair was tried separately, and the transcript of Matthews' trial was never introduced into evidence at any stage of the Housler trial or at any post-trial proceedings involving Housler. As a result, the order of the Montgomery County Circuit Court is REVERSED and VACATED, and the clerk of this court is ORDERED to return to the Montgomery County Circuit Court Clerk the transcript of the trial in State v. Courtney Matthews, Montgomery County Circuit Court No. 33791. |
Montgomery | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Joseph D. Taylor v. State of Tennessee
Petitioner, Joseph Taylor, filed a petition for post-conviction relief which was subsequently amended. Following an evidentiary hearing, the trial court dismissed the petition. On appeal, Petitioner argues that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance of counsel because he (1) failed to adequately meet with Petitioner prior to trial; (2) failed to interview and call certain witnesses to testify; (3) failed to request a jury instruction on assault as a lesser-included offense of attempted rape; and (4) failed to object to the classification of Petitioner as a career offender when the trial court sentenced Petitioner for attempted rape. Petitioner also alleges that his appellate counsel rendered ineffective assistance of counsel when he failed to appeal the classification of Petitioner as a career offender for purposes of sentencing. After a thorough review of the record, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed in part and reversed in part, and this case is remanded to the trial court for a new sentencing hearing in accordance with this opinion. |
Marshall | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Tavarus La'Trent Martindale
The defendant, Tavarus La'Trent Martindale, was convicted by a jury in the Giles County Circuit Court of murder in the first degree and sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. In this appeal as of right, the defendant contends (1) that the evidence is insufficient to convict him of murder in the first degree, (2) that the trial court erred by not excluding the autopsy evidence, and (3) that the trial court's sentencing instructions to the jury were unclear as to the standard for imposing life in prison without the possibility of parole or for imposing life in prison. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Giles | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Deji A. Ogundiya
After a mistrial in August of 2001, the Defendant, Deji Ogundiya, was retried and convicted by a jury of three counts of sexual battery. In this appeal, the Defendant raises several issues, including whether the trial court erred by failing to charge misdemeanor assault as a lesser-included offense of sexual battery. The State concedes that the trial court so erred. We agree that the trial court committed reversible error by failing to charge the jury with the lesser-included offense. Therefore, the Defendant's convictions are reversed and the case is remanded for a new trial. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Ronnie M. Cauthern v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Ronnie M. Cauthern, appeals the Montgomery County Circuit Court's denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. In 1988, the petitioner was convicted by a jury of two counts of felony murder and sentenced to death. He was also convicted of the related crimes of first degree burglary and aggravated rape. His convictions were affirmed on direct appeal by the Tennessee Supreme Court, but his death sentences were reversed and remanded for a new sentencing trial. Upon retrial before a jury in 1995, the petitioner received the death penalty for the murder of one victim and a sentence of life imprisonment for the second victim's murder. Those sentences were appealed and affirmed, following which the petitioner instituted a collateral proceeding seeking post-conviction relief from his convictions and sentences. Lengthy hearings were conducted on the petitioner's claims, the majority of which involved allegations that counsel representing him in his 1988 and 1995 trials rendered constitutionally ineffective assistance of counsel. On appeal, the petitioner contends (1) that trial counsel's services were deficient and prejudicial; (2) that the state suppressed exculpatory evidence in violation of his due process rights; (3) that the United States Supreme Court's opinions in Apprendi v. New Jersey and Ring v. Arizona require that his death sentence be set aside; (4) that he was entitled to but was not notified of his right to seek German consular assistance pursuant to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations; (5) that the lower court erroneously concluded that some of his claims had been waived or previously determined; (6) that Tennessee's system of capital punishment is unconstitutional; and (7) that erroneous jury instructions impaired his right to a fair trial. After an extensive review of the record and consideration of applicable law, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Montgomery | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Shaun David Pierce
The Defendant, Shaun David Pierce, pled guilty to four counts of burglary of an automobile, a Class E felony, two counts of theft over one-thousand dollars, a Class D felony, two counts of theft over five-hundred dollars, a Class E felony, four counts of theft under five-hundred dollars, a Class A misdemeanor, and two counts of vandalism under five-hundred dollars, a Class A misdemeanor. The Defendant received an effective sentence of sixteen years. The sole issue in this direct appeal is whether the trial court erred by not allowing the Defendant to serve his sentence in the community corrections program. We affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Marshall | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Terry Clark
A Dickson County jury convicted the Defendant, Terry Clark, of driving under the influence of an intoxicant ("DUI") and assault. The Defendant alleges that the evidence is insufficient to support her assault conviction. After reviewing the record, we conclude that sufficient evidence exists and, accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Dickson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Ronnie Graves v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner was indicted for first degree murder and subsequently pled guilty to voluntary manslaughter. Pursuant to the plea agreement, the petitioner was sentenced to fifteen years as a career offender with a 60% release eligibility date. The petitioner appeals the post-conviction court’s denial of post-conviction relief, arguing: (1) he received ineffective assistance of counsel; and (2) his guilty plea was made unknowingly with respect to his release eligibility status as a career offender. Upon review of the record and the applicable law, we affirm the post-conviction court’s denial of post-conviction relief. |
Obion | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Donald F. Long v.Tennessee Board of Probation and Parole
The State appeals the trial court's grant of a petition for habeas corpus relief, arguing that the court acted without jurisdiction because the petitioner's sentence has not expired. Because the record reveals a parole violation warrant was issued and the petitioner declared delinquent before the expiration of his six-year sentence, we conclude that the trial court erred in granting the petition for habeas corpus. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. |
Maury | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Marcie A. Murray v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner contends that the post-conviction court erred in denying relief from her convictions for first degree murder and conspiracy to commit first degree murder. The petitioner has failed to show prejudice from any alleged ineffective assistance, and the issue concerning Leonard Rowe's testimony has been previously determined and is not cognizable for relief on post-conviction. The judgment of the post-conviction court is affirmed. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Charles William Young v. State of Tennessee
The Appellant, Charles William Young, appeals the Marshall County Circuit Court's dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. Young is currently incarcerated as a result of a jury conviction for aggravated assault. On appeal, Young presents two issues for our review: (1) whether he received the effective assistance of counsel at trial and (2) whether the court erred in refusing to appoint "advisory counsel" at the post-conviction hearing. After review of the issues, we affirm the dismissal of the petition. |
Marshall | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Darryl D. Jackson v. State of Tennessee
On November 2, 2001, the Davidson County Grand Jury returned a three count indictment against the Petitioner, Darryl D. Jackson. He was charged with possession of a schedule VI controlled substance with intent to sell or deliver, possession of a schedule II controlled substance, and driving on a suspended license. On January 22, 2002, he pled guilty to possession of a schedule VI controlled substance with intent to sell or deliver. The other two charges were dismissed. The appellant received a two year and one month sentence and was given a recommendation for the Department of Correction's Boot Camp program. On October 4. 2002, the petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief and an amended petition on November 14, 2002. A hearing was held on February 18, 2003 and on March 3, 2003, the trial court entered an order denying the petitioner's request for post-conviction relief. In this appeal, the appellant argues that the post-conviction court erred in finding that his guilty plea was entered knowingly and voluntarily and was not the result of trial counsel's ineffective assistance. After a review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Edwin Gomez and Jonathan S. Londono
The Appellants, Edwin Gomez and Jonathan S. Londono, were convicted by a Davidson County jury of conspiracy to commit aggravated robbery, facilitation of first degree felony murder, facilitation of especially aggravated robbery, and facilitation of aggravated robbery. Gomez and Londono were ordered to serve forty-nine years in the Department of Correction as Range I standard offenders. On appeal, Gomez presents the following issues for our review: (1) whether the trial court erred in not suppressing the photographic line-up and subsequent in-court identification and (2) whether it was error to permit testimony concerning $19,600 found in Gomez's apartment. Londono argues that: (1) the trial court erred by admitting the statements of Co-defendant Bryant Guartos; (2) the trial court erred by admitting the statements of the victim as either an excited utterance or a dying declaration; and (3) the evidence was insufficient to support the verdicts. Both Gomez and Londono argue that the length of their respective sentences was excessive and that consecutive sentencing was improper. After a review of the record, the judgments of the trial court are affirmed. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Allen Cutshaw v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, Allen Dale Cutshaw, appeals the trial court's dismissal of his petition for writ of error coram nobis. The State has filed a motion requesting that this Court affirm the trial court's denial of relief pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals. The petition presents no cognizable ground for coram nobis relief. Accordingly, the State's motion is granted and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. |
Greene | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Greg Smith
The defendant, Greg Smith, appeals the trial court's denial of his motion to increase the number of pretrial jail credits applied to his sentence. Because the defendant has no appeal as of right under Tennessee Rule of Appellate Procedure 3(b), the appeal is dismissed. |
Campbell | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Greg Smith - Concurring
I agree with the result reached and most of the reasoning used in the majority opinion. However, I question the conclusion that the trial court was without jurisdiction to entertain a request to grant earned pretrial jail credits. |
Campbell | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Timothy Jefferson v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner was indicted on charges of first degree murder and especially aggravated robbery. He pled guilty to a reduced charge of second degree murder, and the other charge was dismissed. As part of the plea agreement, he received a sentence of forty years, to be served at one hundred percent. The petitioner contends that he received ineffective assistance of counsel, and his guilty plea was involuntary and unknowing. We conclude that the petitioner has failed to show that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel. We also conclude that the petitioner's guilty plea was knowing and voluntary. We affirm the denial of post-conviction relief. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Louise Dawson Marlow
The defendant entered a plea of nolo contendere to reckless homicide and agreed to a sentence of seven years as a Range II, multiple offender. The manner of service of the sentence was to be determined following a sentencing hearing. The trial court ordered the defendant to serve one year in the county jail followed by six years in community corrections. The defendant contends on appeal that the trial court erred in requiring any confinement in this case. We conclude that the defendant is not eligible for community corrections and remand for re-sentencing. |
Coffee | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Andrew Moore v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Andrew Eakin Moore, entered an open plea of guilty to three counts of attempted aggravated robbery, two counts of aggravated assault, and one count of resisting arrest. As a result of the guilty pleas, the petitioner received an effective sentence of ten years on all six counts, but the petitioner was ordered to serve 365 days in jail and then be placed on community corrections for the balance of the sentence. Following his release from the jail sentence, the petitioner violated his community corrections sentence and was ordered to serve the balance of the sentence. In this post-conviction proceeding, the petitioner attacks his conviction on the basis of ineffective assistance of counsel. We affirm the post-conviction court’s dismissal of the petition. |
Bedford | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Joseph M. Stone v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner contends that he received ineffective assistance of counsel and that his guilty pleas were unknowing and involuntary. We conclude that the petitioner has failed to meet his burden of demonstrating by clear and convincing evidence that he was denied the effective assistance of trial counsel. We also conclude that the petitioner's guilty pleas were knowing and voluntary. Based on the foregoing conclusions and the record as a whole, we affirm the denial of post-conviction relief. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals |
