State of Tennessee v. Steven Shelton
The appellant, Steven Shelton, was convicted by a jury in the Greene County Criminal Court of theft of property valued $1000 or more but less than $10,000, a Class D felony. The trial court sentenced the appellant as a Range I standard offender to two years six months confinement in the Greene County Jail. On appeal, the appellant argues that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction and that the trial court erred in denying alternative sentencing. Upon review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. However, we remand to the trial court for the correction of the judgment of conviction to reflect the fine imposed by the jury. |
Greene | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Mikel U. Primm
A Dickson County jury convicted the defendant, Mikel U. Primm, of possession of drug paraphernalia and failure to appear. The trial court sentenced the defendant to serve eleven months and twenty-nine days for his possession of drug paraphernalia conviction and two years for failure to appear conviction, for which he was classified as a Range II multiple offender. The trial court ordered the defendant to serve these sentences concurrently. The defendant now brings this direct appeal challenging his convictions and his sentence, alleging that (1) the evidence introduced at trial is insufficient to support his two convictions, (2) the trial court erroneously denied, within the hearing of the prospective jurors, the defense motion for a continuance, and (3) that the trial court improperly sentenced him by failing to apply several relevant mitigating factors. After a thorough review of the record, we find that none of the defendant's allegations merit relief and therefore affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Dickson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
James Clark Blanton, III v. State of Tennessee
A Davidson County grand jury indicted the petitioner, James Clark Blanton, III, of two counts of especially aggravated robbery, two counts of especially aggravated kidnapping, and one count of coercion of a witness. The petitioner pled guilty to two counts of especially aggravated robbery with an agreement that he would serve two concurrent sentences of fifteen years each at 100%. The petitioner filed a post-conviction petition alleging that he received ineffective assistance of counsel. The post-conviction court held an evidentiary hearing to determine the merits of the petitioner's claim and subsequently denied the petition in a written order. The petitioner now appeals that denial. After reviewing the petitioner's claims and the evidence presented at the post-conviction hearing, we find that none of his allegations merit relief. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Johnny D. Roberts
The defendant, Johnny D. Roberts, was convicted by a Davidson County Criminal Court jury of aggravated rape and aggravated sexual battery. The trial court merged the defendant's convictions into one conviction for aggravated rape and sentenced him as a Range I, violent offender to twenty-five years in the Department of Correction. The defendant appeals, claiming that (1) the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions, (2) the trial court erroneously admitted into evidence a tape recording and transcript of the victim's 9-1-1 telephone call to the police, (3) the trial court erred by failing to declare a mistrial after the prosecutor commented on the defendant's failure to testify, and (4) the trial court erred by refusing to apply a mitigating factor in sentencing him. We affirm the judgment of conviction. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Harold Russell Gregory
The defendant, Harold Russell Gregory, was convicted in the Davidson County Criminal Court of driving under the influence (DUI), second offense, a Class A misdemeanor. The trial court sentenced him to eleven months, twenty-nine days to be served as forty-five days, day for day, in the county jail and the remainder to be served on probation. In addition, the trial court suspended the defendant's driving privileges for two years, ordered that he participate in an alcohol evaluation and treatment program, and imposed a six hundred dollar fine. The defendant appeals, claiming (1) that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction; (2) that the trial court should have granted his motion to suppress evidence that was obtained pursuant to an illegal stop; (3) that his request for an attorney was not an express refusal to take a breathalyzer test; and (4) that the trial court erred by refusing to allow a defense witness to testify. We affirm the trial court's actions. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Charlene Denise Franks
The defendant, Charlene Denise Franks, entered pleas of guilt to two counts of aggravated burglary. The trial court imposed Range I concurrent sentences of three years on each offense and granted supervised probation. A probation violation warrant resulted in a revocation. The issue on appeal is whether the trial court abused its discretion. The judgment is affirmed. |
Hardin | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Samuel Pegues v. State of Tennessee
The Appellant, Samuel Pegues, appeals the Madison County Circuit Court's dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. Pegues was convicted of second degree murder and received a sentence of twenty-one and one-half years. On appeal, the single issue presented for our review is whether Pegues was denied the effective assistance of counsel. Following a review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court dismissing the petition. |
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Brenda F. Jones
The Appellant, Brenda F. Jones, was indicted by a Madison County Grand Jury for the offenses of vehicular homicide and driving under the influence of an intoxicant (DUI). Following a jury trial, the Appellant was convicted of DUI but acquitted of vehicular homicide. For the DUI conviction, the trial court sentenced Jones to eleven months, twenty-nine days, with sixty days confinement. On appeal, Jones argues that a term of sixty days confinement is excessive because (1) the trial court's sentence reflects consideration of conduct for which Jones was exonerated, and (2) the trial court improperly applied enhancement factors and failed to apply relevant mitigating factors. After review of the record, we find merit to both issues. Accordingly, we modify Jones' sentence to eleven months, twenty-nine days with service of twenty days confinement. |
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Patrick Deshun Paris, alias Patrick Deshon Parris
A jury found the defendant guilty of first degree premeditated murder, first degree felony murder, and especially aggravated robbery. The two first degree murder convictions merged, and the jury sentenced the defendant to life without the possibility of parole. The trial court sentenced the defendant to twenty-four years for especially aggravated robbery, to run concurrently with his previous sentence for abuse of a corpse. The defendant argues that the trial court erred in failing to suppress an incriminating statement he made on December 2, 1998, that the jury charge regarding criminal responsibility was in error and that his sentencing was erroneous. We affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Tommy Joe Walker v. State of Tennessee
Convicted in 1990 of first-degree felony murder, aggravated robbery, and conspiracy to commit aggravated robbery, the petitioner, Tommy Joe Walker, appeals the Knox County Criminal Court's dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief, through which he claimed that ineffective assistance of trial counsel fouled his convictions. Because the record supports the denial of post-conviction relief, we affirm. |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Antonio Huntsman
The defendant, Antonio Huntsman, was convicted of reckless homicide and the trial court ordered a sentence of three years and six months. In this appeal of right, the defendant asserts (1) that the trial court erroneously limited cross-examination of an eyewitness; (2) that the trial court allowed the admission of irrelevant evidence; (3) that the sentence was excessive; and (4) that he was erroneously denied some form of alternative sentencing. The judgment is affirmed. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Melvin Cofer
The defendant, Melvin Cofer, was convicted of aggravated vehicular homicide, see Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 39-13-213, -218, and vehicular assault, see Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-106. The trial court imposed Range I, concurrent sentences of twenty-one years and three years, respectively. In this appeal, the defendant asserts (1) that the trial court erred by refusing to suppress the results of the blood alcohol test; (2) that the trial court erred by limiting defense counsel's questioning of potential jurors; (3) that the evidence is insufficient to support the aggravated vehicular homicide conviction; (4) that the trial court erred by refusing to qualify a defense witness as an expert; (5) that the state failed to establish a proper chain of custody prior to the admission of the results of the blood alcohol test; and (6) that the trial court erred by denying his request for special jury instructions. The judgments of the trial court are affirmed. |
Hardeman | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Doyle Borders
The Defendant, Doyle Borders, pled guilty to possession of Dilaudid, a Schedule II controlled substance, with the intent to sell or deliver. As part of his plea agreement, he expressly reserved with the consent of the trial court and the State the right to appeal a certified question of law pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 37(b)(2)(i). The certified question of law concerns the validity of a search warrant. Finding no error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Sumner | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Janice Hall
After a bench trial, the Defendant, Janice Hall, was convicted of two counts of vandalism under five hundred dollars, a Class A misdemeanor. The trial judge sentenced her to concurrent terms of eleven months and twenty-nine days, with thirty-five days to serve in confinement. In this direct appeal, the Defendant argues that the evidence was insufficient to support her convictions and that the trial judge erred by ordering her to serve thirty-five days in confinement. We affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
White | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Danny R. King v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner and his co-defendant were convicted of aggravated rape and aggravated kidnapping. The Petitioner appealed, and our Court affirmed the convictions. The Petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief, which the trial court denied. Our Court affirmed the denial, concluding that the Petitioner had received effective assistance of counsel. The Petitioner then filed a post-conviction petition requesting DNA (deoxyribonucleic) testing pursuant to the Post-Conviction DNA Analysis Act of 2001. After the State responded that no biological evidence was in existence to be tested, the Petitioner requested that the court appoint him new counsel. The trial court denied both the Petitioner's post-conviction petition for DNA testing and his request for new counsel. The Petitioner now appeals, arguing that the trial court erred by denying his post-conviction petition for DNA testing and by denying his request for new counsel. Finding no error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Williamson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Terry Tarrant
The Franklin County Grand Jury indicted the Defendant and Susan Davis, the co-defendant, for one count of aggravated robbery and for one count of theft of property valued between five hundred and one thousand dollars. A jury convicted the Defendant and co-defendant on both counts. The Defendant now appeals, contesting the sufficiency of the State's evidence. Specifically, the Defendant contends that the State did not introduce sufficient evidence for a rational jury to find beyond a reasonable doubt that the Defendant entered the home of the alleged victims. Finding no error, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Franklin | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
James Russell Gann v. David Mills, Warden
The Defendant, James Russell Gann, petitioned for habeas corpus relief on the grounds that his judgment of conviction is not signed by the trial judge. The trial court denied relief and this direct appeal followed. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Morgan | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Tyrone Cunningham
The defendant, Tyrone Cunningham, appeals from his conviction by a Lauderdale County Circuit Court jury of second degree murder. The trial court sentenced him as a career, violent offender to the maximum sentence of sixty years. The defendant contends that (1) the evidence is insufficient to support his second degree murder conviction, (2) the trial court erroneously denied his pretrial motion for a continuance, and (3) the trial court erred in sentencing him as a career offender. We affirm the trial court's judgment of conviction. |
Lauderdale | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Edward Lee Tucker v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Edward Lee Tucker, filed a motion to withdraw his guilty plea to the charge of criminal attempt to commit first degree murder due to the invalidity of the plea. The trial court found that the motion should be considered as a petition for post-conviction relief and dismissed the petition as barred by the statute of limitations. Upon review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Fayette | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Tommy Lee Midgett
The defendant was tried on two counts of first degree premeditated murder and convicted of two counts of facilitation of first degree murder for which he received consecutive twenty-four-year sentences. In his appeal, he presents the following claims: (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions; (2) the trial court erred in excluding evidence of others having motives to kill the victims; (3) the State made an improper statement during its closing argument that constituted plain error; and (4) the trial court erred in sentencing. Following our review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Scott Dwayne Martin v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Scott Dwayne Martin, appeals from the trial court's denial of post-conviction relief. In this appeal of right, the petitioner contends that because he was denied the effective assistance of counsel, his guilty pleas were neither knowingly nor voluntarily made. The judgment is affirmed. |
Hamblen | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
John C. Wells, III v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner was originally convicted by a Davidson County jury on nine counts of aggravated sexual battery and received an effective ninety-year sentence. He now appeals the denial of post-conviction relief, contending: (1) the post-conviction judge, who was a Deputy District Attorney General at the time of the original prosecution, should have recused herself; (2) he received ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel; (3) numerous errors of constitutional dimension occurred at his original trial and on direct appeal; and (4) cumulative errors require that he be granted relief. In spite of our concerns regarding the recusal issue, we are unable to discern any material distinctions with prior cases which have affirmed the failure to recuse. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Shaun Givens v. David Mills, Warden
The Petitioner, Shaun Givens, appeals the trial court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief. 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. After review, we conclude that the Petitioner fails to assert a ground entitling him to habeas corpus relief. Accordingly, the State's motion is granted and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. |
Lauderdale | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Phyllis Hines
The defendant, Phyllis Hines, pled guilty to two counts of simple assault, a Class A misdemeanor. The Sevier County trial court imposed consecutive sentences of eleven months and twenty-nine days for each count of assault. It then ordered the defendant to serve the first eleven-month and twenty-nine-day sentence at 75% in confinement followed by probation. On appeal, the defendant contends the trial court erred in imposing confinement. We affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Sevier | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Jeffrey Douglas Stratton
Defendant, Jeffrey Douglas Stratton, was indicted on two counts of burglary. Defendant entered guilty pleas to both counts. Defendant was sentenced to two years for each conviction, to be served concurrently with each other and consecutively to his sentence for a prior conviction. Defendant contends that the trial court erred by ordering a sentence of incarceration. After reviewing the record, we conclude that a sentence of confinement was supported by the record. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. |
Blount | Court of Criminal Appeals |
