Gene Shelton Rucker v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, Gene Shelton Rucker, appeals as of right from the Hamilton County Criminal Court's dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The Petitioner contends that his sentence was enhanced in violation of his Sixth Amendment rights. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the habeas corpus court. |
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Curtis Smith v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Curtis Smith, appeals the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. On appeal, he argues that the court erred in determining that: his guilty plea was knowingly and voluntarily entered; trial counsel provided effective assistance of counsel; and the trial court did not abuse its discretion in accepting his guilty plea. After careful review, we affirm the denial of post-conviction relief. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Corey Finley v. State of Tennessee
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Derrick Gates
The appellant, Derrick Gates, pled guilty in the Shelby County Criminal Court to aggravated robbery and attempted aggravated robbery. After a sentencing hearing, the trial court ordered him to serve consecutive sentences of thirty and ten years, respectively. On appeal, the appellant argues that the trial court erred by ordering consecutive sentencing. Based upon the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Michael Hilliard
The defendant, Michael Hilliard, was indicted on March 25, 2003, for first degree premeditated murder, felony murder, attempted first degree murder, and especially aggravated robbery. The defendant was tried on the charges in June 2007, with the State seeking the death penalty. However, a mistrial was declared after the jury was unable to reach verdicts on the charges. In December 2007, the defendant was indicted for especially aggravated robbery, allegedly occurring during the 2002 episode in which the victim was shot and the defendant was charged with attempted first degree murder. The defendant then was tried upon the indictment returned in 2003, as well as that returned in 2007, and found guilty of two counts of criminally negligent homicide which were merged, one count of misdemeanor reckless endangerment, and two counts of aggravated robbery. He was sentenced to an effective sentence of seventeen years, eleven months, twenty-nine days. On appeal, he argues both that the trial court erred in not dismissing the 2007 indictment for especially aggravated robbery because it was not returned with the 2003 indictment and in concluding that he could not present evidence of the guilt of a third party. Following our review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Michael Pierre Adams
The Defendant, Michael Pierre Adams, appeals as of right from the Hamilton County Criminal Court's revocation of his community corrections sentences and order of incarceration. The Defendant contends that (1) the trial court's revocation is erroneous and based upon insufficient proof and (2) the State failed to provide him with adequate discovery before the hearing. Additionally, the judgments of the trial court do not reflect that the Defendant was given credit for time served in community corrections. See Tenn. Code Ann. _ 40-36-106(e)(4). Following our review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court but remand the case for correction of the judgments to reflect credit for time served in community corrections. |
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Jackie L. Dozier
A Macon County jury convicted the Defendant, Jackie L. Dozier, of three counts of sexual battery, three counts of incest, and one count of attempted sexual battery. The trial court imposed a total effective sentence of nine years, ordering the defendant to serve two years of his sentence in jail and the rest on probation. In this appeal, the defendant contends the trial court erred when it: (1) denied his Motion for Judgment of Acquittal; (2) imposed consecutive sentencing; and (3) imposed a period of confinement in excess of one year as part of a sentence of split confinement. After a thorough review of the record and relevant authorities, we conclude the evidence supports the defendant's convictions, but the trial court erred when it sentenced the defendant. As such, we affirm the defendant's convictions, but we reverse the trial court's imposition of consecutive sentencing and order the defendant's sentences to be served concurrently. |
Macon | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Jason E. McLean
Appellant, Jason E. McLean, was charged with first degree murder after he shot and killed eighteen-year-old Sean Powell. At trial, the jury found appellant not guilty of first degree murder but guilty of reckless homicide, a lesser-included offense. The trial court denied appellant's request for judicial diversion and sentenced him to the four-year maximum sentence. It then suspended all but ninety days and ordered appellant to serve eleven years and two-hundred and seventy-five days on probation. On appeal, appellant contends the trial court erred in: (1) denying judicial diversion; (2) sentencing appellant to the maximum sentence in the applicable range; and (3) ordering a lengthy probationary period. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Claude David Merritt
The Defendant, Claude David Merritt, entered an "open" guilty plea to one count of aggravated vehicular homicide, a Class A felony. See Tenn. Code Ann. _ 39-13-218(d). The trial court sentenced him as a Range II, multiple offender to forty years in the Department of Correction. In this appeal, the defendant asserts that his sentence is excessive. After a review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Bedford | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Russell Lenox Hamblin
The defendant, Russell Lenox Hamblin, was convicted of three counts of aggravated robbery and sentenced to ten years for each of the first two convictions and to twelve years for the third conviction. All the sentences were ordered to run consecutively, for a total effective sentence of thirty-two years. On appeal, he argues that: the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions; the trial court erred in admitting evidence of the sale and purchase of automobiles; the trial court abused its discretion in allowing his credibility to be impeached; and he was improperly sentenced. After careful review, we affirm the judgments from the trial court. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
James Hall v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, James Hall, appeals as of right from the Davidson County Criminal Court's summary dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging his sentence for his conviction of possession with intent to distribute 0.5 grams of a schedule II controlled substance. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the habeas corpus court. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Young Bok Song v. State of Tennessee
A Davidson County jury convicted the Petitioner, Young Bok Song, of seven counts of rape of a child and four counts of aggravated sexual battery, and the trial court sentenced him to serve sixty-five years at 100%. The petitioner filed a petition for a writ of error coram nobis, which the trial court dismissed. On appeal, the petitioner raises a number of issues related to the trial court's determination that he was not entitled to relief based upon newly discovered evidence. After a thorough review of the record and the applicable authorities, we affirm the trial court's judgment. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Timothy Neal James v. State of Tennessee
Pursuant to a plea agreement, the Petitioner, Timothy Neal James, pled guilty to two counts of rape of a child and one count of incest, and the trial court sentenced him to an effective sentence of twenty-five years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief, which the post-conviction court denied after a hearing. On appeal, the petitioner contends that he received the ineffective assistance of counsel and that his guilty plea was not knowingly and voluntarily entered. After a thorough review of the record and applicable law, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Sumner | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Travis R. Morris v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, Travis R. Morris, appeals the Rhea County Circuit Court's denial of postconviction relief from his conviction for sexual exploitation of a minor, a Class B felony, for which he received a ten-year sentence to be served as fifteen years of probation as a Range I offender. See T.C.A. _ 39-17-1003 (2006). The petitioner contends that the trial court erred in failing to make written findings of fact and conclusions of law, that he did not receive the effective assistance of counsel in connection with his guilty plea, and that his guilty plea was not knowingly and voluntarily entered because he was mentally impaired by the effects of a prescription drug. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Rhea | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Doyle Benton
The Defendant, Doyle Benton, pled guilty and was sentenced as a Range I, standard offender to three years' confinement for criminal conspiracy to sell schedule II cocaine in an amount less than 0.5 grams, a Class D felony; to five years' confinement for sale and delivery of schedule II cocaine in an amount less than 0.5 grams, a Class C felony; and to three years' confinement for sale and delivery of schedule III narcotics, a Class D felony; all to be served concurrently for an effective sentence of five years' confinement. On appeal, the defendant contends that his sentences are excessive in length and that the trial court erred by denying his request for probation. The judgments of the trial court are affirmed. |
Bradley | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Dexter F. Johnson v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, Dexter F. Johnson, appeals from the post-conviction court's order denying his motion to reopen his petition for post-conviction relief. The State has filed a motion requesting that this court affirm the post-conviction court's order pursuant to Rule 20 of the Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals. Following our review, the State's motion is granted, and the judgment of the post-conviction court is affirmed. |
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
John Anthony Bailey v. State of Tennessee
Petitioner John Anthony Bailey filed the present petition for post-conviction relief in 2009 seeking relief from convictions entered in 1995 and 1996. Petitioner acknowledged that his petition was not filed within the one year statute of limitations; however, he asserted that due process required tolling of the statute of limitations. The post-conviction court denied relief. We affirm. |
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Steven Ray Kennedy v. State of Tennessee
The pro se petitioner, Steven Ray Kennedy, appeals the post-conviction court's summary dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. He argues that the court should have given him fifteen days to file an amended petition that conformed to the statutory requirements or appointed counsel to assist in presenting his claims of ineffective assistance of counsel and unknowing and involuntary guilty plea. After review, we affirm the summary dismissal of the petition by the post-conviction court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Mark Hines
The Defendant, Mark Hines, was found guilty by a Shelby County Criminal Court jury of criminal attempt to commit second degree murder. See T.C.A. __ 39-13-210(a)(1), 39-12- 101(a)(2), -(3) (2006). He was sentenced as a Range I, standard offender to ten years' confinement in the Department of Correction. On appeal, he contends that (1) the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction, (2) the trial court erred by permitting the State to introduce prejudicial demonstrative evidence to the jury, (3) the trial court erred by admitting testimonial hearsay into evidence, (4) the trial court erred by giving incorrect and incomplete jury instructions, and (5) he was improperly sentenced. We affirm the conviction, but we reverse the sentence and remand the case for resentencing. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Alfred Eugene Bradley v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, Alfred Eugene Bradley, filed a petition for post-conviction relief, raising numerous claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. After a hearing, the post-conviction court denied the petition, finding that trial counsel was not ineffective, and the Petitioner timely appealed. We affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Korinna Stephens v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, Korinna Stephens, appeals as of right from the order of the Knox County Criminal Court denying her petition for post-conviction relief challenging her convictions of aggravated robbery, theft of property valued at over one thousand dollars, and possession of drug paraphernalia for which she received an effective sentence of twelve years as a Range I, standard offender. On appeal, she contends that her guilty pleas were rendered involuntarily by the ineffective assistance of counsel. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
David Carl Duncan v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, David Carl Duncan, appeals as of right from the Davidson County Criminal Court's summary dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging his conviction for first degree murder. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the habeas corpus court. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Howard J. Atkins v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Howard J. Atkins, appeals the summary dismissal of his petition for writ of error coram nobis. On appeal, he argues that the trial court abused its discretion in determining that there was no newly discovered evidence and that his petition was untimely pursuant to the statute of limitations and in dismissing his petition without an evidentiary hearing. After careful review, we affirm the dismissal of the petition. |
Tipton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Jonathan Doran Tears
Following a jury trial, the Defendant, Jonathan Doran Tears, was convicted of attempted second degree murder, a Class B felony (Count 1); two counts of aggravated assault, a Class C felony (Counts 2-3); unlawful possession of a weapon, a Class E felony (Count 4); possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, a Class D felony (Count 5); and employment of a firearm during the commission of a felony, a Class C felony (Count 6). The trial court merged Counts 2 and 3 with Count 1, and the trial court merged Counts 4 and 5 with Count 6. The trial court then sentenced the Defendant as a Range II, multiple offender and ordered the Defendant to serve 15 years for the attempted second degree murder conviction and a consecutive 10 years for the employment of a firearm during the commission of a felony conviction, for a total effective sentence of 25 years. The trial court also ordered these sentences to be served consecutively to a sentence imposed in a separate case. In this appeal as of right, the Defendant contends that (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions of attempted second degree murder and possession and employment of a firearm during the commission of a felony and that (2) the trial court erred in sentencing him. Following our review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Marshall | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Willie J. Cunningham v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Willie J. Cunningham, appeals the dismissal of his petition for writ of habeas corpus by the Circuit Court for Hardeman County. The State has filed a motion requesting that this court affirm the trial court's denial of relief pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals because the petition fails to state a cognizable claim for relief. Upon our review of the petition and the applicable authorities, we grant the State's motion and affirm the judgment of the lower court. |
Hardeman | Court of Criminal Appeals |
