COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OPINIONS

State vs. John Childress
02C01-9605-CC-00154
Trial Court Judge: Joseph H. Walker, III

State vs. James Marion
02C01-9605-CR-00158
Trial Court Judge: Joseph B. Dailey

01C01-9606-CC-00257
01C01-9606-CC-00257

01C01-9607-CC-00289
01C01-9607-CC-00289

01C01-9507-CC-00219
01C01-9507-CC-00219

01C01-9508-CR-00264
01C01-9508-CR-00264

01C01-9401-CC-00017
01C01-9401-CC-00017
Trial Court Judge: John H. Gasaway, III

01C01-9401-CC-00025
01C01-9401-CC-00025
Trial Court Judge: Donald P. Harris

01C01-9511-CC-00378
01C01-9511-CC-00378
Trial Court Judge: Leonard W. Martin

01C01-9601-CR-00041
01C01-9601-CR-00041

01C01-9603-CR-00084
01C01-9603-CR-00084

01C01-9605-CR-00215
01C01-9605-CR-00215
Trial Court Judge: J. O. Bond

01C01-9605-CR-00191
01C01-9605-CR-00191
Trial Court Judge: Seth W. Norman

01C01-9605-CR-00203
01C01-9605-CR-00203
Trial Court Judge: J. Randall Wyatt, Jr.

State vs. Johnny Smith
02C01-9602-CR-00061
Trial Court Judge: James C. Beasley, Jr.

State vs. Mario Gutierrez
02C01-9502-CC-00043

03C01-9605-CC-00190
03C01-9605-CC-00190
Trial Court Judge: Rex Henry Ogle

State vs. Miller
03C01-9608-CR-00300
Trial Court Judge: R. Jerry Beck

State vs. Brown
03C01-9604-CC-00140

State vs. Violet
03C01-9603-CC-00135
Trial Court Judge: Mayo L. Mashburn

State vs. Hicks
03C01-9602-CC-00064

State vs. Copeland
03C01-9605-CC-00196
Trial Court Judge: D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.

State vs. Robert Gober
M1999-01425-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Robert W. Wedemeyer
The Defendant was convicted of two counts of aggravated assault. For these crimes, he was sentenced to concurrent terms of eight years to be served in the Department of Correction as a Range II, multiple offender. On appeal, he challenges the sufficiency of the convicting evidence and argues that he was improperly sentenced. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Randy Anderson - Dissenting
01C01-9412-CC-00406
Authoring Judge: Judge Paul G. Summers
Trial Court Judge: Judge Jim T. Hamilton

I respectfully disagree with my colleagues in this case. I do not believe that the prosecutor's remarks concerning the appellant's intention to plead guilty prejudiced him or deprived him of a fair trial. As pointed out by the majority, Judge v. State1 provides five factors to be considered in assessing the prejudicial effect of improper argument. The five factors are:

1. The conduct complained of viewed in context and in light of the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. The curative measures undertaken by the court and the prosecution.
3. The intent of the prosecutor in making the improper statement.
4. The cumulative effect of the improper conduct and any other errors in the record.
5. The relative strength or weakness of the case.

State of Tennessee v. Judone A. Lee and William C. Waters
01C01-9603-CR-00081
Authoring Judge: Judge William M. Barker
Trial Court Judge: Judge Seth W. Norman

The State of Tennessee appeals as of right the Davidson County Criminal Court’s dismissal of the Appellees’ indictments for possession of cocaine with intent to sell or deliver. The trial court found that the Appellees’ protection against former jeopardy had been violated in that the Appellees had already been punished for their crimes by the State’s seizure of two vehicles used in the drug sale. The State argues on appeal that the civil forfeiture of the Appellees’ vehicles does not amount to punishment pursuant to the double jeopardy clauses of the United States and the Tennessee Constitutions. We agree and reverse the trial court.