State of Tennessee v. Felix Bartolo Jose
The Appellant, Felix Bartolo Jose, was convicted of one count of aggravated sexual battery, a class B felony, following a jury trial. The trial court sentenced Jose to an eight-year sentence in the Department of Correction. On appeal, Jose raises the single issue of whether the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict. After review of the record, we affirm the conviction. |
Henry | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
James C. Breer v. State of Tennessee
The Appellant, James C. Breer, appeals the summary dismissal of his pro se petition for postconviction relief. The Henry County Circuit Court dismissed Breer’s petition upon the ground that it failed to state a colorable claim. Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-206(f) (1997). After review, we conclude that a colorable claim is presented and the postconviction court erred in dismissing Breer’s petition without conducting an evidentiary hearing and without appointing counsel. Accordingly, we remand for proceedings consistent with this opinion. |
Henry | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Alorra D. Puckett
|
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Alorra D. Puckett - Dissenting
|
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Eric James Taylor, alias
The Defendant, Eric James Taylor, Alias, was convicted by a jury of first degree premeditated murder and aggravated assault. The Defendant now appeals as of right from his murder conviction, alleging seven errors: (1) the trial court should have allowed him to cross-examine a prosecution witness about pending theft charges; (2) the trial court should have instructed the jury about the State's duty to preserve evidence; (3) the prosecutor impermissibly shifted the burden of proof to the Defendant during closing argument; (4) the trial court should have instructed the jury on the lesser-included offense of vehicular homicide; (5) the trial court should have allowed him to cross-examine a prosecution witness about the victim's pre-offense surgery; (6) the evidence is not sufficient to support his murder conviction; and (7) a police officer testifying for the State improperly referred to prior contacts with the Defendant. Finding no merit to the Defendant's contentions, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Gene Booker
The Appellant was convicted of aggravated robbery by a jury in the Criminal Court for Shelby County, and the trial court sentenced him to sixteen years of confinement as a Range II Multiple Offender. The Appellant raises the following issues on appeal: (1) whether sufficient evidence was presented at trial to convict the Appellant of the charged offense, and (2) whether the trial court erred in failing to charge the jury on the lesser-included offenses of robbery and theft. Finding no reversible error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Joseph Harold Rucker
The defendant, Joseph Harold Rucker, appeals the Roane County Criminal Court's imposition of a 23-year Department of Correction sentence for the second-degree murder of his girlfriend, Tommy Jean Trinkle. Because we determine that the length of the Class A, Range I sentence is supported in the record, we affirm. |
Roane | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Tracy Washington
A Rhea County grand jury indicted the defendant on one count of sexual battery. At the conclusion of a trial, the jury convicted him as charged and fined him one thousand dollars. The trial court subsequently imposed a sentence of one year and six months, of which the defendant was ordered to serve thirty days. After unsuccessfully pursuing a judgment of acquittal or alternatively a new trial in the trial court, the defendant brings this appeal. Herein, he asserts that the record lacks sufficient evidence to sustain his conviction, that the trial court erred in failing to give the jury a curative instruction to disregard a hearsay statement made by the victim in court, and that the trial court erred in permitting the victim's brother to testify regarding a hearsay statement made by the victim. After reviewing the record and relevant authorities, we find that the defendant has waived one of these claims and that the remaining issues merit no relief. We, therefore, affirm the defendant's conviction. |
Rhea | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Anthony Jerome Stokes v. State of Tennessee
|
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Charles Weston Elsea, Jr. v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Charles Weston Elsea, Jr., appeals the trial court's denial of post-conviction relief. The single issue presented for review is whether he was denied the effective assistance of counsel at trial and on appeal. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. |
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Gregory Dale Clayton
The appellant, Gregory Dale Clayton, was found guilty by a jury in the Davidson County Criminal Court of driving under the influence (DUI). The trial court imposed a sentence of eleven months and twenty-nine days incarceration in the Davidson County Jail. Additionally, the appellant pled guilty to a violation of the implied consent law and suffered the forfeiture of his driver's license for one year. On appeal, the appellant raises two issues relating to the rendering of the jury's verdict. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Marvin L. Jones, alias Al Amin Hasson
The defendant, Marvin L. Jones, appeals the trial court's revocation of a community corrections sentence. The single issue presented for review is whether the trial court abused its discretion. The judgment is affirmed. |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Olean W. Thompson
The defendant Olean W. Thompson, pled guilty to theft of property $1,000 or more in value and aggravated robbery. Pursuant to a bench trial, he was found guilty of his four remaining indicted charges, four counts of especially aggravated kidnapping. The trial court then sentenced the defendant to serve two years for his theft conviction, eight years for his robbery conviction, and twenty years for each of his kidnapping convictions. The court then ordered the defendant to serve these sentences concurrently, resulting in a twenty-year aggregate sentence. The defendant now appeals his convictions and sentence, claiming that his due process rights were violated by his four convictions for especially aggravated kidnapping and that the trial court erred by imposing excessive sentences for each of his kidnapping convictions. After a thorough review of the record, we find that none of the defendant's allegations merit relief and accordingly affirm the defendant's convictions and sentence. |
Williamson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Billy J. Coffelt v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Billy J. Coffelt, was convicted of assault with intent to commit first degree murder and assault with intent to commit robbery with a deadly weapon. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief, alleging the ineffective assistance of counsel, which petition was dismissed by the post-conviction court without a hearing. The petitioner currently appeals this ruling. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we reverse the judgment of the post-conviction court and remand for an evidentiary hearing on the petition for post-conviction relief. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Tammy Annette Burruss
The defendant, Tammy Annette Burruss, was convicted by a Bedford County Circuit Court jury of theft of a vehicle worth more than $10,000, a Class C felony, for which she received a four-year sentence as a Range I, standard offender. She contends that the evidence is insufficient to support her conviction and that the trial court erred by allowing the state to impeach her with a prior bad check conviction pursuant to Tenn. R. Evid. 609(b). We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Bedford | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Timothy Murrell
The appellant (defendant), Timothy Murrell, was convicted by a Madison County jury of the offenses of possession of cocaine with the intent to sell, possession of cocaine with intent to deliver, and possession of drug paraphernalia. The two (2) felonious possession of cocaine convictions were merged. The trial court sentenced the defendant to twenty (20) years in the Department of Correction for these offenses and eleven months and twenty-nine days for the drug paraphernalia conviction. These sentences were to run concurrently for a total effective sentence of twenty years. In this appeal the defendant raises five issues for our review: (1) whether the evidence is sufficient to support the convictions for felonious possession of cocaine; (2) whether the trial court erred in declining to give the jury a missing witness instruction; (3) whether the trial court erred in allowing police officers to testify that the cocaine found in the defendant's possession was for re-sale; (4) whether the trial court erred in refusing to admit certain evidence for impeachment; and (5) whether the trial court erred in declining to apply a mitigating factor offered by the defendant at sentencing. After a thorough review of the record and applicable authorities, we find no reversible error. Therefore, the judgments of the trial court are affirmed. |
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Terrell Burgess v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Terrell Burgess, appeals the Shelby County Criminal Court's denial of his petition for post-conviction relief from his guilty pleas to first degree felony murder, aggravated robbery, and two counts of aggravated assault and his resulting effective sentence of life plus ten years in the Department of Correction (DOC). He contends (1) that he received the ineffective assistance of counsel and (2) that his attorney coerced him into pleading guilty. We affirm the trial court's denial of the petition. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. William E. Eakes
The Davidson County Grand Jury indicted the Defendant for one count of first degree felony murder and for one count of second degree murder. A Davidson County jury convicted the Defendant of both offenses. The trial court merged the second degree murder conviction into the felony murder conviction and sentenced the Defendant to life imprisonment. The Defendant now appeals, arguing that insufficient evidence was presented at trial to convict him of first degree felony murder and of second degree murder. Concluding that sufficient evidence was presented to convict the Defendant for felony murder and second degree murder, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Leslie Brian Willis
Following the reversal of his first degree felony murder conviction due to insufficient evidence to support the predicate felony, the defendant, upon remand, was convicted by a jury of second degree murder. On this appeal, he raises the following issues: (1) Whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain a conviction for second degree murder; (2) Whether second degree murder is a lesser included offense of first degree felony murder; (3) Whether the trial court erred in allowing the State to recall witness William Alley during its case in chief; (4) Whether the trial court erred in allowing the testimony of TBI Agent Mike Breedlove, in violation of Tenn. R. Crim. P. 404(b), that the defendant threatened to break his neck; and (5) Whether the trial court erred in sentencing the defendant to the maximum twenty-five years. We affirm the defendant's conviction for second degree murder. |
Robertson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. James Stanley Beckman, Sr.
The appellant, James Stanley Beckman, Sr., was indicted by the Bedford County Grand Jury on one count of theft over $10,000 in July 2001. After a jury trial, the defendant was convicted as a Range I offender, and sentenced to four years at thirty percent in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On January 4, 2002, the appellant filed a motion for a new trial which was denied on February 22, 2002. In this appeal, the appellant raises the issue of whether the evidence is sufficient for a conviction of theft of property over $10,000. After a review of this record we find that the evidence is sufficient. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. |
Bedford | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Dennis R. Jenkins
The appellant, Dennis R. Jenkins, pled guilty in the Rutherford County Circuit Court to possession of methamphetamine, a Schedule II controlled substance, with intent to deliver. The trial court sentenced the appellant to three years to be served on probation and imposed a two thousand dollar ($2,000) fine. Pursuant to the plea agreement, the appellant reserved the right to appeal as a certified question of law the trial court's denial of his motion to suppress. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Rutherford | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Joseph Lance Risner v. State of Tennessee
The Appellant, Joseph Lance Risner, appeals from the dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. Pursuant to a "package deal" plea, Risner, along with five of his co-defendants, pled guilty to three counts of first degree murder, one count of attempted murder, two counts of especially aggravated kidnapping, two counts of kidnapping, and one count of class D felony theft. On appeal, Risner presents the following issues for our review: (1) whether his plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered; (2) whether he was denied the effective assistance of counsel; and (3) whether the indictment, which did not include the aggravating circumstances qualifying him for the death penalty violates Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S. Ct. 2348 (2000), and is, thus, unconstitutional. Finding no reversible error, we affirm the judgment of the Greene County Criminal Court. |
Greene | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Billy Wayne Cosby v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Billy Wayne Cosby, pled nolo contendere in the Giles County Circuit Court to aggravated assault and received a sentence of eight years incarceration. Subsequently, the petitioner filed for post-conviction relief, which petition was denied. On appeal, the petitioner contests the summary dismissal of his post-conviction petition. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we reverse the judgment of the post-conviction court and remand for the appointment of new counsel and further proceedings in accordance with this opinion. |
Giles | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Leonard Edward Baugh, Jr. v. State of Tennessee
A Davidson County jury found the Petitioner, Leonard E. Baugh, Jr., guilty of one count of especially aggravated robbery, five counts of especially aggravated kidnapping, one count of aggravated burglary, and one count of unlawful possession of a weapon by a felon. The trial court imposed an effective sentence of thirty years. The convictions and sentences were affirmed on direct appeal. See State v. Leonard Edward Baugh, Jr., M2000-00477-CCA-R3-CD, 2001 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 415, (Tenn. Crim. App., Nashville, June 1, 2001). The Petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. Following an evidentiary hearing, the post-conviction court dismissed the petition. We affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Lawrence E. Truman
The defendant, Lawrence E. Truman, appeals as of right his conviction by the Williamson County Circuit Court for driving under the influence of an intoxicant (DUI), a Class A misdemeanor. The trial court sentenced the defendant to eleven months, twenty-nine days, with seven days of the sentence to be served in the county jail and the balance on probation. The defendant, who remained free on bond following his conviction, failed to appear for a subsequent review hearing, and the trial court issued a capias for his arrest. In this appeal, the defendant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support his DUI conviction. We dismiss the appeal because the defendant remains on escape status. |
Williamson | Court of Criminal Appeals |
