State of Tennessee v. Shawn M. Brooks
The Appellant, Shawn M. Brooks, appeals from the judgment of the Wilson County Circuit Court revoking his probation. In May of 1996, Brooks pled guilty to sale of a Schedule I controlled substance, lysergic acid diethylamide (LSD), and received a split confinement sentence of eight years with one year to be served in confinement followed by seven years supervised probation. Again, in May of 1999, Brooks pled guilty to sale of a counterfeit controlled substance and received a two-year suspended sentence to be served consecutively to the 1996 sentence. On April 10, 2001, a probation violation warrant was issued for only the1996 sentence based upon a new arrest in DeKalb County for numerous offenses. At the probation violation hearing, Brooks admitted guilt, which resulted in the revocation of his sentence and the reinstatement of his original eight-year sentence in the Department of Correction. Thirty days later, an amended order was entered by the trial court revoking Brooks' 1999 two-year suspended sentence on the same grounds. On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred by failing to consider alternatives to revocation. After review, we find that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by revoking Brooks' 1996 conviction. However, with regard to revocation of the 1999 sentence, we find that the proceedings failed to afford fundamental due process protections. Accordingly, we reverse and vacate the trial court's amended order revoking Brooks' two-year suspended sentence for sale of a counterfeit controlled substance. |
Wilson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Bobby Gene Goodson
The defendant, Bobby Gene Goodson, appeals as of right his Sullivan County Criminal Court conviction in case number S42,000 for driving on a suspended license, a Class B misdemeanor, claiming that (1) the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction, (2) he has a constitutional right to travel, and (3) the trial court erred in denying his request to dismiss his trial attorney and reappoint counsel. The defendant also appeals his remaining two convictions in S42,000 for violation of the registration law and violation of the seat belt law, both Class C misdemeanors, and his conviction in case number S43,579 for driving on a suspended license. As to the defendant's appeal of his conviction for driving on a suspended license in case number S42,000, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. With regard to the remaining convictions, the defendant's appeal is dismissed because the judgments of conviction are not in the record on appeal. |
Sullivan | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Barry F. Braden
Defendant, Barry F. Braden, was convicted by a Davidson County jury of six counts of aggravated robbery, a Class B felony. He was ordered to serve consecutive ten year sentences for counts one, two, four, five and six, to be served concurrently with a ten-year sentence in count three, for an effective sentence of fifty years. Defendant appeals his convictions and sentences, presenting the following issues for review: (1) whether the prosecutor’s inquiry on cross-examination and comments during closing argument on Defendant’s failure to submit fingerprints and his failure to take a polygraph examination constituted reversible error; (2) whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain his convictions; (3) whether the trial court erred by admitting a witness’s extraneous statement at trial; (4) whether the trial court erred by ordering consecutive sentences for five of Defendant’s six convictions; and (5) whether the trial court erred by failing to sever the offenses for |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Robert Gentry Galbreath
A Bedford County jury convicted the defendant of twelve counts of obtaining a controlled substance, Hydrocodone, by fraud during the period from August 15, 2000 through September 8, 2000. The trial court sentenced the defendant to twelve years on each count and imposed a fine of $2,000 for each count. The trial court ordered that counts 1-4 run concurrently; that counts 5-8 run concurrently, but consecutive to counts 1-4; and that counts 9-12 run concurrently, but consecutive to all other counts, for an effective sentence of thirty-six years. On appeal, the defendant contends that the evidence is not sufficient to support eleven of his twelve convictions for fraud and that the trial court erred in sentencing him to thirty-six years in prison. Finding no error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Bedford | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Charles Bryant v. State of Tennessee
Petitioner/Appellant, Charles Bryant, filed a petition for post-conviction relief on August 3, 2001, attacking his conviction on July 18, 1997, for violation of the Motor Vehicle Habitual Offender Act. According to the allegations in the petition, there was no appeal from the conviction to which he pled guilty and received a sentence of four years as a multiple Range II offender. The trial court summarily dismissed the petition because it was filed outside of the applicable statute of limitations. We affirm. |
Coffee | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Timothy M. Hodge
The defendant appeals his conviction for driving under the influence. He raises two issues: (1) whether the evidence was sufficient to support his conviction; and (2) whether the trial court erred in its instruction to the jury regarding the definition of "physical control" of a vehicle. After a review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Hickman | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. John W. Archey
A Franklin County jury convicted the defendant of reckless driving. On appeal, the defendant challenges the sufficiency of the convicting evidence. The defendant also claims that the trial court's jury instruction for reckless driving was in error. After a careful review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Franklin | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Joel Wayne Jackson and Joel Keith Russell
The appellants, Joel Wayne Jackson and Joel Keith Russell, were each convicted in the Hardin County Circuit Court of one count of possessing more than .5 grams of cocaine with intent to sell. They were each sentenced to eight years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction with the sentences to be served on supervised probation after serving ninety days in confinement. On appeal, Jackson challenges the correctness of his sentence and Russell contests the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgments of the trial court |
Hardin | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Stanley R. Fine
The defendant, Stanley R. Fine, pled guilty to the offenses of burglary and aggravated burglary. His plea agreement provided that he would serve a four year sentence for the aggravated burglary, with one year to be served in the county jail and the balance of three years to be served in the community corrections program. With respect to the burglary charge, the plea agreement included an agreed sentence of four years to be served in the community corrections program consecutive to the sentence for aggravated burglary, resulting in an effective sentence of eight years. Following the defendant's violation of the terms of his community corrections sentence, the trial court revoked the defendant's community corrections status and ordered that the remainder of his sentence be served in the Department of Correction. The defendant now appeals the trial court's ruling. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Rhea | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Michael Scott Brogan
The defendant, Michael Scott Brogan, entered pleas of guilt to second degree murder and attempted second degree murder. The trial court imposed concurrent sentences of 20 years and 8 years, respectively. In this appeal of right, the defendant asserts that his sentence for second degree murder is excessive. Because the trial court misapplied several enhancement factors, the sentence for second degree murder is modified to 18 years. Otherwise, the judgments are affirmed. |
Claiborne | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Tricia Ann Landry
The defendant, Tricia Ann Landry, was convicted of theft over $500.00 and theft over $1,000.00. The trial court imposed concurrent Range I sentences of two years and three years, respectively. Later, the defendant was determined to have violated her probation. The trial court ordered service of the sentence in the Department of Correction. In this appeal of right, the defendant argues that the trial court should have granted an alternative sentence. The judgment is affirmed. |
Blount | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Demetrius Kendale Holmes
The defendant, Demetrius Kendale Holmes, was convicted of felony murder and especially aggravated robbery. The trial court imposed consecutive sentences of life and 24 years, respectively. In this appeal of right, the defendant asserts that the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions. The judgments of the trial court are affirmed. |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Claude W. Cheeks - Dissenting
|
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Claude W. Cheeks
|
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Daryl Lee Madden and Marty Dale Williams
|
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Jerry O. Summers
The defendant, Jerry O. Summers, appeals from the Williamson County Circuit Court’s revoking his probation that was ordered for his sentence for aggravated burglary. The defendant contends that although he violated his probation, the trial court erred in sentencing him to confinement. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Williamson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Philip R. Haven
A Williamson County grand jury indicted the defendant on alternative counts of driving under the influence of an intoxicant and of driving with a .10% or more alcohol concentration in his blood or breath. At the conclusion of the proof, the trial jury convicted the defendant of the latter offense and assessed a fifteen hundred dollar fine. At sentencing, the trial court approved the fine assessed and further sentenced the defendant to six months to be suspended after the service of thirty days, day for day. Additionally, the court placed the defendant on supervised probation for eleven months and twenty-nine days during which time, among other conditions, the defendant was to complete alcohol safety school. Subsequently, the defendant filed a motion for a new trial or judgment of acquittal, which the trial court denied. Through this appeal the defendant contends that the trial court erred in 1) not excusing four jurors for cause; 2) permitting the prosecutor to make ingratiating statements to the jury during voir dire; 3) overruling counsel's objection to the prosecutor's comment in opening statement that the defendant was "drunk, way too drunk to drive"; 4) finding that the involved forensic scientist for the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation was the custodian of the alcohol report, thereby allowing the admission of the report into evidence; 5) concluding that "adult driving while impaired" was not a lesser included offense of driving under the influence; 6) refusing to dismiss count two of the indictment as a nullity; and 7) sentencing the defendant to more than the seven-consecutive-day minimum sentence applicable here. After reviewing each of these assertions, we find that none merit relief and, therefore, affirm the defendant's conviction and sentence. However, in reviewing the case, we have observed an error in the judgment form and, therefore, remand the matter for entry of a corrected judgment. |
Williamson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Rhonda Patricia Mayes
Defendant was convicted of two counts of possession of cocaine with intent to sell and two counts of simple possession of cocaine. The trial court merged the two counts of possession of cocaine with intent to sell into one count and merged the two counts of simple possession of cocaine into one count. The trial court sentenced the defendant to concurrent sentences of eight years and eleven months and twenty-nine days, respectively, thus imposing an effective eight-year sentence. Defendant appealed on four grounds: (1) there was insufficient evidence to support the conviction for possession with intent to sell cocaine; (2) a search warrant failed to state sufficient facts to establish probable cause to search defendant's apartment; (3) the indictment was multiplicitous; and (4) the trial court erred in ruling that the State could use defendant's prior conviction to show intent. We conclude that all convictions should merge into a single judgment of conviction for possession of cocaine with intent to sell; thus, we vacate the sentence relating to simple possession of cocaine, although this will not change the effective eight-year sentence. |
Marshall | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Ricky Lynn Earls
|
Marshall | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Deadrick M. Pigg v. State of Tennessee
A Davidson County grand jury indicted the defendant on one count of felonious unlawful possession of a weapon and one count of misdemeanor evading arrest. Following a jury trial, the defendant was acquitted of the weapons offense but convicted of evading arrest. At the conclusion of a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced the defendant to eleven months and twenty-nine days for this conviction. The court also ordered this sentence to run consecutively to another sentence stemming from a separate arrest. The defendant next unsuccessfully filed a motion for a judgment of acquittal or, in the alternative, a new trial. Through this appeal he continues to assert that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction. However, after reviewing the record, we find that this issue lacks merit and, therefore, affirm the defendant's conviction for evading arrest. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Jason Brian Hargrove
The appellant, Jason Brian Hargrove, pled guilty in the Marshall County Circuit Court to numerous counts of theft and burglary. He received a total effective sentence of twenty years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the appellant raises the following issue for our review: whether the trial court erred in imposing consecutive sentences. After reviewing the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Marshall | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Edward Lucas
The appellant, Edward Lucas, was convicted in the Montgomery County Circuit Court of two counts of selling cocaine and one count of possession of marijuana with the intent to sell. The trial court imposed an effective sentence of six years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction, sixty days of which were to be served in confinement with the remainder to be served on probation. Subsequently, the trial court found the appellant guilty of violating his probation and ordered the appellant to serve his sentence in confinement. The appellant raises the following issues on appeal: (1) whether the allegation set forth in the violation of probation warrant states a violation of the conditions of probation; (2) whether the allegation set forth in the violation of probation warrant complies with due process requirements of the United States and Tennessee Constitutions; and (3) whether the evidence is sufficient to support the probation revocation. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Montgomery | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Delaney E. Marcum
The Appellant, Delaney E. Marcum, appeals from the sentencing decision of the Williamson County Circuit Court. Marcum entered guilty pleas to one count of aggravated burglary, a class C felony, and one count of theft of property over $1,000.00, a class D felony. Under the terms of the agreement, Marcum received concurrent sentences of five years for aggravated burglary and four years for theft. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court ordered that Marcum's sentences be served in the Department of Correction and, additionally, he was ordered to pay restitution on both counts. On appeal, Marcum contends that the trial court erred in (1) not sentencing him to probation or any other alternative to incarceration, and (2) ordering restitution in conjunction with total confinement. Finding no error, the judgment of the Williamson County Circuit Court is affirmed. |
Williamson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Debra Kay Thomas
The defendant, Debra Kay Thomas, appeals the Henry County Circuit Court's resentencing her upon revocation of her community corrections sentence. She claims that the trial court erred in failing to give her credit for the time she served in confinement and in the community corrections program under her original sentence. The state agrees. We hold that the defendant was improperly sentenced and remand the case for resentencing. |
Henry | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Jack Roger Norton
|
Washington | Court of Criminal Appeals |
