State vs. Robert Wilks
|
Hickman | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Leslie Brian Willis
|
Robertson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Leslie Brian Willis
|
Robertson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Corey Lamont Radley
|
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Anthony T. Jones
|
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Alfred Terry Peck vs. State
|
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Merrian Logan
|
Lake | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Russell Overby
|
Hardin | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Stanley Warren Mills
|
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Roger Morris Gardner
|
Sullivan | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Douglas Rains
|
Benton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Charles Smith
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Christie Thomas
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Delfro Willis
|
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Christopher D. Smith
|
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee vs. Anand Franklin
The appellant, Anand Franklin, was convicted by a Davidson County jury of one (1) count of aggravated sexual battery, a Class B felony. The trial court sentenced him as a Range I offender to eight (8) years incarceration. On appeal, the appellant claims that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. After a thorough review of the |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee vs. David Eugene Smith, Jr.
The appellant, David E. Smith, Jr., appeals the verdict of a Davidson County jury finding him guilty of one count of theft of property over $1,000, a class D felony. For this offense, the appellant received a two year suspended sentence. On appeal, the appellant challenges the sufficiency of the convicting evidence and contends that the trial court erred by denying his request for judicial diversion. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee vs. James Richard Watson
The defendant, James Richard Watson, appeals from his sentence imposed for aggravated assault, a Class C felony, in the McMinn County Criminal Court. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-102(a)(1)(B) (1997). The trial court imposed a five year sentence in the Tennessee Department of Correction. In this direct appeal, the defendant challenges the length of the sentence imposed and the manner of service. After a review of the record, the briefs of the parties, and the applicable law, we affirm the sentence. |
McMinn | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Louis Lavergne
The appellant, Louis Lavergne, pled guilty to the offense of voluntary manslaughter in the Davidson County Criminal Court.1 Pursuant to the plea agreement, both the length of the sentence and the manner of service were submitted to the trial court for determination. The trial court subsequently imposed a four year sentence to be served in the Department of Correction. In this appeal, the appellant challenges both the length of the sentence and the trial court’s denial of a sentencing alternative to total confinement. After a review of the record, the appellant’s four year sentence is affirmed, however, the manner of service is modified to reflect a split confinement sentence of six months confinement in the local jail or workhouse with the remainder of the four year sentence to be served on supervised probation. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee vs. Charles R. Smith
A Hardeman County jury convicted defendant of aggravated burglary, a Class C felony, and theft of property valued at $500, a Class A misdemeanor. The sole issue in this appeal as of right is sufficiency of the evidence. We find the evidence sufficient to support the convictions and AFFIRM the judgment of the trial court. |
Hardeman | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee vs. Terry Wayne Hayman
Defendant, Terry Wayne Haymon, appeals as of right his convictions by a Dyer County jury on three counts of aggravated robbery. Honorable J. Steven Stafford sentenced the defendant to concurrent terms of thirty years as a career offender. The following issues are presented for our review: 1. whether the evidence is sufficient to support the convictions;
|
Dyer | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee vs. Lamar Fletcher
This matter is before the Court upon motion of the state to affirm the judgment of the trial court by order rather than formal opinion. See Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals. This case represents an appeal from the trial court’s dismissal of the petitioner’s petition for writ of habeas corpus. The petitioner is currently serving a life sentence, having been found to be an habitual criminal in 1985. In his present petition, the petitioner claims that his conviction is void because his trial attorney worked as a Public Defender and Assistant District Attorney at the same time. |
Lauderdale | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee vs. Michael D. Hawkins
The appellant, Michael D. Hawkins, appeals as of right from the trial court’s revocation of his suspended sentence. Following a hearing, the trial court found that the appellant had violated conditions of his probation and ordered execution of the entire sentence as originally entered. On appeal, the appellant contends that the trial court should have granted intensive probation or an alternative sentence, specifically Community Corrections. |
Blount | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Richard Allen
Defendant, Richard Allen, was indicted for the first degree murders of David Lee Day and James Kevin Huckaby. A Davidson County jury convicted the defendant of the lesser offense of second degree murder of David Lee Day and acquitted him of the Huckaby homicide. The trial court sentenced him as a Range I standard offender to twenty-five years incarceration. In this appeal as of right, defendant contends that his conviction must be reversed because of insufficient evidence to corroborate the testimony of an accomplice. The state prosecuted this accomplice for first degree murder, sought the death penalty, and allowed him to plead guilty to second degree murder during the accomplice's trial. The state has now changed its position and argues that he was not an accomplice. This is, however, impermissible. Since this felon-accomplice provided the only testimony linking the defendant to the crime, the long-standing, firmly established law in this state requires us to REVERSE the conviction. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Daniel M. Tidwell
|
Williamson | Court of Criminal Appeals |