State of Tennessee v. Douglas A. Mathis
A Sullivan County jury convicted the defendant of theft over $1,000 for stealing a car. On appeal, he argues the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Sullivan | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Carl G. Dodd
|
Rhea | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Stevie Lawson
|
Hawkins | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. James Robert Wilson
Defendant, James Robert Wilson, was convicted by a Davidson County jury of first degree felony murder and especially aggravated robbery. He was ordered to serve concurrent sentences of life imprisonment for the felony murder conviction and twenty years for the especially aggravated robbery conviction. Defendant appeals his convictions and presents the following five issues for review: (1) whether the trial court erred by admitting audio taped threat evidence; (2) whether the trial court erred by denying Defendant's motion for a mistrial based on a witness's characterization of Defendant as a "robber"; (3) whether the trial court erred by denying Defendant's motion for a mistrial based on the State's comment that Defendant failed to call a witness; (4) whether the trial court erred by denying Defendant's request for a jury instruction on accomplice testimony; and (5) whether the trial court erred in failing to charge all applicable lesser-included offenses. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Charles Kirby
The appellant, Charles Kirby, was found guilty of facilitation of the sale of cocaine in the amount of .5 gram or more. He was sentenced to five years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The appellant timely filed a notice of appeal, alleging that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction. After review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Gibson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Jermaine A. Paine v. State of Tennessee
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Steven James McCain
The appellant, Steven James McCain, was convicted by a jury in the Criminal Court of Davidson County of two counts of first degree premeditated murder. He received two consecutive sentences of life imprisonment with the possibility of parole. On appeal, the appellant raises the following issues for our review: (1) whether the trial court erred in denying the appellant's "Motion to Suppress Identifications Made During an Unconstitutional Photographic Line-Up Procedure"; (2) whether the trial court erred in denying the appellant's "Motion to Suppress Defendant's Statements"; (3) whether the trial court erred in admitting the audio-tape-recorded statement of Chad Collins; (4) whether the trial court erred in overruling the defense request for a mistrial when the prosecution improperly argued that the jury should consider Chad Collins' statement as substantive evidence at trial; and (5) whether the evidence was sufficient to support his convictions. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Willie J. Miller, Jr.
|
Williamson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Steven Dalton
|
Hickman | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Ricky T. Hughes
A Davidson County Criminal Court jury convicted the defendant, Ricky T. Hughes, of facilitation of first degree felony murder, a Class A felony, and especially aggravated robbery, a Class A felony. The trial court sentenced him to consecutive sentences of twenty-five years as a standard offender for the facilitation conviction and twenty-five years as a violent offender for the aggravated robbery conviction. The defendant appeals, claiming that (1) the evidence is insufficient to support his |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Terry Norris
A Shelby County jury found the Defendant guilty of second degree murder, and the trial court sentenced him to twenty-one years incarceration. The Defendant now appeals his conviction, arguing that he received ineffective assistance of counsel at trial because (1) his counsel failed to file a motion to suppress his confession based upon a violation of the Defendant's Fourth Amendment rights; and (2) his counsel argued a theory of defense to the jury that was contrary to the Defendant's wishes and testimony. We conclude that the Defendant's trial counsel were not ineffective for failing to base the motion to suppress the Defendant's confession on a violation of the Defendant's Fourth Amendment rights. We further conclude that although the Defendant's counsel did not comply with the Defendant's wish to proceed at trial under a theory of self-defense, any error in this regard was harmless in light of the record as a whole. We therefore affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Tracy Farrell
The defendant, Tracy Farrell, appeals from his eleven drug convictions rendered by a McMinn County Criminal Court jury. On appeal he challenges the trial court's failure to grant a severance of offenses. We have determined that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to sever offenses, and we affirm the conviction judgments. |
McMinn | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Nathan Scott Ramagos
The defendant pled guilty to one count of sexual battery, a Class E felony; one count of indecent exposure, a Class A misdemeanor; and one count of reckless aggravated assault, a Class D felony. Denying his request for probation, the trial court sentenced him as a Range I, standard offender to the maximum sentence for each offense, for an effective sentence of four years. In a timely appeal to this court, the defendant challenges his sentences, arguing that the trial court erred in its application of enhancement factors, and in failing to find any factors in mitigation. Based upon our review, we conclude that two of the three enhancement factors found applicable by the trial court are unsupported by the record, but that the remaining enhancement factor, the defendant's prior history of criminal conduct, is entitled to great weight. We further conclude that mitigating factor (1), the defendant's actions did not cause or threaten serious bodily injury, applies to the defendant's convictions for sexual battery and indecent exposure, but that it carries very little, if any, weight in mitigation. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's denial of the defendant's request for probation, and the sentences imposed in this case. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Steven L. Rauhuff
The defendant was indicted for operation of a motor vehicle after being declared an habitual offender. Following a bench trial, he was convicted of the indicted offense. In this appeal, the defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence. We affirm. |
Blount | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Charles H. Martin
The Defendant, Charles H. Martin, was convicted by a jury of aggravated assault. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced him as a Range I offender to six years in the Department of Correction. On appeal, the Defendant contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion to strike handwritten portions of the indictment. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Sevier | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. James L. McCurry
The Appellant, James L. McCurry, was convicted by a Roane County jury of one count of premeditated first degree murder and was sentenced to life imprisonment. On appeal, McCurry raises two issues for our review: (1) Whether the evidence presented at trial was sufficient to support a conviction for premeditated first degree murder; and (2) whether the trial court erred by failing to exercise its role as the thirteenth juror. After review, we find no error and affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Roane | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Scotty DeWayne Robinson
The defendant, Scotty Dewayne Robinson, pled guilty to Class D felony theft pursuant to a plea agreement recommending the imposition of a three-year sentence to be served consecutively to a federal sentence. The trial court accepted the defendant's plea of guilty and imposed the recommended sentence. In this appeal, the defendant argues the trial court improperly sentenced him. We conclude the defendant has no appeal as of right of his sentence since it was a part of a plea agreement in which the defendant waived the right to appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Felicia Joann Cannon
|
Bedford | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Ronald Eugene Rickman and William Edward Groseclose
The appellants, Ronald Eugene Rickman and William Edward Groseclose, appeal their convictions by a jury in the Shelby County Criminal Court of, respectively, first degree murder and being an accessory before the fact to first degree murder. In this appeal, appellant Groseclose presents the following issues for our consideration: (1) whether the trial court erred in failing to sever his trial from that of co-defendant Rickman; (2) whether the trial court erred in admitting at trial the former testimony of Barton Wayne Mount; (3) whether the trial court erred in excluding testimony by Gary King; and (4) whether the evidence adduced at trial is sufficient to support the jury's verdict of guilt. Appellant Rickman solely challenges the introduction at trial of Mount's former testimony. Following a careful review of the record and the parties' briefs, we remand this case to the trial court for correction of the judgments to reflect the appellants' receipt of credit for time served in the Tennessee Department of Correction prior to trial. We affirm the judgments in all other respects |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. James D. Newland
The defendant, James D. Newland, appeals from the Sullivan County Criminal Court's revoking his probation that was ordered for his guilty plea to rape. The defendant contends that the trial court abused its discretion in revoking his probation and sentencing him to confinement. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Sullivan | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Jerry Allen Ketchum
The Defendant entered a plea of nolo contendere to attempted aggravated sexual battery. Pursuant to his plea agreement, the Defendant received a four-year sentence, with the manner of service of the sentence to be determined by the trial court. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court ordered that the Defendant serve the four-year sentence in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The Defendant now appeals, arguing that he should have received some form of alternative sentencing. Concluding that the record supports the trial court's denial of alternative sentencing, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Sullivan | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Roy Lane v. State of Tennessee
This appeal by the petitioner, Roy Lane, involves both a delayed appeal from his first degree murder conviction and an appeal from the denial of post-conviction relief. In the delayed appeal, the petitioner contends that the Cocke County Circuit Court (1) improperly admitted evidence about the petitioner's prior bad acts and (2) gave erroneous jury instructions. In the post-conviction appeal, the petitioner claims that he received the ineffective assistance of trial counsel. As to the petitioner's delayed appeal, we conclude that the trial court did not err and affirm his conviction for first degree premeditated murder. As to his post-conviction petition, we affirm the trial court's finding that the petitioner received the effective assistance of counsel. |
Cocke | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Robbie Gene Powers
The Appellant, Robbie Gene Powers, challenges his convictions for driving under the influence of an intoxicant (DUI), third offense; driving on a revoked license, third offense; and violation of the implied consent law. The Appellant received an effective sentence of eleven months and twenty-nine days, with six months and five days of incarceration in the county jail. On appeal, the Appellant argues that: (1) the trial court erred in denying his motion to set aside or declare void two prior DUI convictions, which were used for enhancement purposes; (2) the evidence was insufficient to sustain his convictions; and (3) his sentences were excessive. After a review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the Obion County Circuit Court. |
Obion | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Collin J. Johnson and Jason S. Porterfield
The state brings this interlocutory appeal in which it challenges the order of the Rutherford County Circuit Court authorizing the admission into evidence of certain testimony relating to the prior sexual behavior of the alleged rape victim. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand for further proceedings. |
Rutherford | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Larry D. Simmons and Tyce Renard Jackson
The appellants, Tyce Jackson and Larry Simmons, were initially charged with delinquency in a juvenile petition filed in the Juvenile Court for Montgomery County. This petition arose out of two separate car jackings occurring in October of 1997. A hearing was held in the juvenile court upon the State's petition to transfer the appellants to criminal court for trial as adults. Finding that the appellants should be tried as adults, the juvenile court transferred the case to the Montgomery County Criminal Court. The appellants appealed their transfer by way of a petition for the writ of certiorari filed in the criminal court. The criminal court denied the writ. The appellants were indicted on two counts of especially aggravated kidnapping, two counts of carjacking, two counts of aggravated robbery, two counts of illegal weapon possession and one count of aggravated assault. Both appellants ultimately entered guilty pleas in criminal court to one count of aggravated kidnapping and one count of aggravated assault. They each received concurrent sentences of ten and six years respectively. As part of the plea agreement the appellants reserved a certified question of law concerning the standard used by the juvenile court in transferring the appellants for trial as adults. The appellants claim that because proof at the transfer hearing showed them to be "voluntarily committable" to an institution for the developmentally disabled or mentally ill they were not subject to transfer for trial as adults. In addition, Appellant Simmons alleges that the evidence at the transfer hearing failed to adequately identify him as a perpetrator of the offenses. We find that while Tennessee Code Annotated section 37-1-134(a)(4)(B) prohibits the transfer to criminal court of juveniles who are "involuntarily committable" to a mental health facility, no such prohibition exists with respect to juveniles whose mental disorders might make them subject to voluntary admission to a mental health facility. In addition, we find that Appellant Simmons has failed to present this Court with a record sufficient to permit review of the issue concerning his identity as a perpetrator of the offenses at issue in this appeal. The judgments, conviction and sentences are therefore affirmed. |
Montgomery | Court of Criminal Appeals |
