State of Tennessee v. Mark Alan Deakins
The defendant, Mark Alan Deakins, appeals the revocation of his probation, claiming that the State failed to establish a probation violation by substantial evidence. Because the record establishes that the defendant violated the terms of his probationary sentence, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Eric Tyreese Davis v. State of Tennessee
Petitioner, Eric Tyreese Davis, appeals the post-conviction court’s dismissal of his postconviction petition in which Petitioner alleged that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance of trial counsel in connection with the entry of his pleas of guilty, and that his guilty pleas were not voluntarily or knowingly entered. After a thorough review we affirm |
Wilson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Deborah Jo Orr
The Defendant, Deborah Jo Orr, was charged with one count of driving under the influence (fourth offense), one count of driving on a revoked license (first offense), one count of violating the implied consent law, and one count of possession of drug paraphernalia. Following a jury trial, she was convicted as charged. In this direct appeal, she contends that the State presented evidence insufficient to convict her of driving under the influence. After our review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Dickson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Richard Ferrell
After a jury trial, the Defendant, Richard Ferrell, was convicted of driving on a suspended license. The trial court subsequently sentenced the Defendant to a term of six months, with sixty days of the sentence to be served in the county jail followed by supervised probation. In this direct appeal, the Defendant argues that the evidence is insufficient as a matter of law to support his conviction and that the trial court erred by ordering him to serve sixty days in incarceration. Following a review of the sparse record presented on appeal, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Warren | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Mark Anthony Haynes
The defendant, Mark Anthony Haynes, pled guilty in the Bedford County Circuit Court to three counts of violation of the sex offender registry law, a Class E felony, and was sentenced to consecutive terms of one year, six months for each offense, for a total effective sentence of four years and six months in the Department of Correction. On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred by denying his request for alternative sentencing. Following our review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Bedford | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Michelle Tipton v. State of Tennessee
A Sevier County jury convicted the Petitioner, Michelle Tipton, of felony murder, robbery, and second-degree murder, and the trial court imposed a life sentence. On direct appeal, this Court reversed the second-degree murder conviction, merged the robbery conviction with the felony murder conviction, and affirmed the life sentence. The Petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief claiming she received the ineffective assistance of counsel. The post-conviction court denied relief after a hearing, and the Petitioner now appeals. After a thorough review of the record and applicable law, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Sevier | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Kenneth L. Peachman
Defendant, Kenneth L. Peachman, along with seven co-defendants, was indicted in count one of the indictment for first degree, premeditated murder. The co-defendants’ cases are not part of this appeal. Defendant entered a plea of guilty in count one to the lesser included offense of second degree murder, with sentencing left to the discretion of the trial court. Pursuant to the negotiated plea agreement, the State agreed to enter a nolle prosequi as to the remaining counts of the indictment. Defendant filed a pro se motion to withdraw his plea of guilty before sentencing, which was denied by the trial court. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced Defendant, as a Range One, standard offender, to twenty-four years, six months. On appeal, Defendant argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion to withdraw his plea of guilty, and that the trial court erred in its sentencing determinations. After a thorough review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Montgomery | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Rudolph Powers v. State of Tennessee
The Appellant, Rudolph Powers, appeals the trial court's summary dismissal of his petition for habeas corpus relief. The Appellant failed to assert a cognizable claim for which habeas corpus relief may be granted. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. |
Wayne | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Ramone Pierre Gholston
The Defendant, Ramone Pierre Gholston, was convicted by a Montgomery County jury of facilitation of first degree murder, a Class A felony, and facilitation of especially aggravated robbery, a Class B felony. The trial court sentenced the Defendant as a Range I, standard offender to twenty-one years for the facilitation of first degree murder and to ten years for the facilitation of especially aggravated robbery, to be served concurrently. On appeal, the Defendant contends that his sentence for the facilitation of first degree murder is excessive. Because no written waiver of ex post factor rights signed by the Defendant is in the record, the Defendant was improperly sentenced under the 2005 amendments to the Sentencing Act of 1989. We reverse the judgment of the trial court, and we remand the case for resentencing. |
Montgomery | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Tyrice L. Sawyers v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Tyrice L. Sawyers, filed in the Davidson County Criminal Court two petitions for post-conviction relief. The post-conviction court dismissed both petitions as untimely, and the petitioner appeals. Upon review, we affirm the judgments of the post-conviction court. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Darren Brown
The defendant, Darren Brown, was convicted by a Shelby County Criminal Court jury of first degree premeditated murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. On appeal, he argues that (1) the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction; (2) the trial court erred in denying his motion for mistrial in light of the prosecutor’s improper closing argument; and (3) the State’s comment on the defendant’s post-arrest silence constitutes plain error. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Christopher N. Orlando v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Christopher N. Orlando, appeals from the summary dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. Holding that the petition is time-barred, we affirm. |
DeKalb | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Alvis Leroy Sadler v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Alvis Leroy Sadler, appeals from the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. In this appeal, he asserts that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel and that he did not knowingly and voluntarily plead guilty. Discerning no error, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Joseph Benjamin Comer, IV
The Defendant, Joseph Benjamin Comer, IV, was convicted in the Loudon County Criminal Court on his guilty plea of reckless endangerment, a Class A misdemeanor, for which he received an eleven-month, twenty-nine-day sentence on probation. At issue in this appeal is the amount of restitution for damages caused by his crime. We affirm the judgment in part and remand the case to the trial court for entry of a corrected judgment reflecting that restitution is to be paid in monthly installments of $200. |
Loudon | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Terry Byington
The Defendant, Terry Byington, appeals his convictions by a jury in the Sullivan County Criminal Court for driving under the influence (DUI), fourth offense, a Class E felony; driving under the influence, a Class A misdemeanor; and driving on a revoked license, a Class B misdemeanor. The trial court merged the DUI convictions and sentenced the Defendant to four years for DUI and to six months for driving on a revoked license, to be served concurrently, for an effective four-year sentence in the Department of Correction. In this delayed appeal, the Defendant contends that the trial judge committed reversible error by refusing to recuse herself because she had formerly prosecuted the Defendant. We affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Sullivan | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. William J. Wilson - Concurring
I join in the results reached by the majority insofar as we do not have an adequate record in which to review the particulars of the Defendant’s case. I write separately to express my concern that the probation rule in question, if applied to all probationers, offends due process. The rule prohibits contact or association with any adults who have minor children. The breadth of such a prohibition is problematic and the relationship of the prohibition to the goals of probation is questionable. |
Bledsoe | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. William J. Wilson
The Defendant, William J. Wilson, pled guilty to two counts of attempted aggravated sexual battery, a Class C felony, and the trial court sentenced him to two consecutive sentences of six years, one year to be served in prison and the remainder to be served on probation. After a warrant was filed, the trial court found that the Defendant had violated his probation by dating, befriending, residing or uniting with someone who had children under the age of eighteen, because the Defendant has filed for a marriage license with a woman who had “several” children under the age of eighteen. The trial court ordered the Defendant returned to probation for ten years and required that he not have any contact with his fiancé, including telephone contact. The Defendant appealed, contending: (1) that the condition of probation requiring he not date or befriend a person with minor children had not been articulated to him by the trial court, as required by statute, and, further, is unconstitutional; and (2) that the condition that he refrain from telephone contact with his fiancé is unconstitutional. For the reasons stated herein, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Bledsoe | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Xavier Tyrone Nolan
The Defendant, Xavier Tyrone Nolan, was convicted by a Knox County Criminal Court jury of attempted voluntary manslaughter, a Class D felony, and aggravated assault, a Class C felony. The trial court merged the attempted voluntary manslaughter conviction into the aggravated assault conviction and sentenced the Defendant to a Range I sentence of five years in the Department of Correction. On appeal, he argues that the trial court improperly enhanced his sentence. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Tony Young v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, Tony Young, appeals the denial of post-conviction relief. He was originally convicted by a jury of aggravated rape, aggravated sexual battery, especially aggravated kidnapping, and four counts of aggravated assault. He was sentenced to concurrent terms of twenty-five years for the aggravated rape and especially aggravated kidnapping convictions, concurrent six year terms for each of the four aggravated assault convictions, and twelve years for the aggravated sexual battery conviction. These several sentences were to be served consecutively to each other for an effective sentence of forty-three years. The petitioner claims he received ineffective assistance of counsel at trial and on appeal. Upon review, we affirm the denial of post-conviction relief.
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Carlos Cooper v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, Carlos Cooper, appeals the Madison County Circuit Court’s denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. He originally pled guilty to attempt to obtain a controlled substance by fraud and two counts of possession of cocaine, a Schedule II narcotic, with intent to sell or deliver 0.5 grams or greater. He received a four-year sentence for the attempt offense and eight-year sentences for his convictions for possession of cocaine with intent to sell or deliver, all to be served concurrently, for an effective sentence of eight years. The petitioner was originally ordered to serve the eight year sentence on Community Corrections. On appeal, the Petitioner contends that he did not enter a knowing and voluntary guilty plea because he received ineffective assistance of counsel. Upon review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.
|
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Ronald Lee Stewart
The Defendant, Ronald Lee Stewart, appeals as of right from his convictions in the Marshall County Circuit Court for one count of aggravated burglary, a Class C felony, one count of theft of property valued at less than five hundred dollars, a Class A misdemeanor, and one count of theft of property valued between one thousand and ten thousand dollars, a Class D felony. The Defendant received an effective sentence of twelve years to be served in incarceration. In this appeal as of right, the Defendant claims that his convictions are constitutionally infirm due to juror fatigue and that the trial court erred in sentencing him as a persistent offender. Following our review, we conclude that the Defendant failed to prepare an accurate record of the subject of this appeal and his issues are waived. Accordingly, the judgments of the trial court are affirmed. |
Marshall | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. James Nelson
The defendant, James Nelson, was convicted of reckless endangerment with a deadly weapon, a Class E felony, as a lesser included offense of the indicted offense of aggravated assault. He was sentenced, as a Range III, persistent offender, to six years in confinement. On appeal, he contends that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction and that he was sentenced improperly. After careful review, we affirm the judgment from the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Linn Cook v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Linn Cook, appeals the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief and argues that he received ineffective assistance of counsel at trial and that he was improperly sentenced in violation of Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004). After careful review, we affirm the post-conviction court’s denial of relief.
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Augustine J. Leon v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, Augustine J. Leon, pled guilty to evading arrest and reckless endangerment, both Class E felonies, and eleven other misdemeanor traffic offenses. The Petitioner received an effective sentence of two years as a Range I, standard offender, to be served in the Department of Correction consecutively to a previously imposed sentence of three years, for a total effective sentence of five years. The Petitioner filed a post-conviction petition attacking his convictions and sentence based upon his alleged mental incompetence at the time of the guilty plea, failure of the State and the trial court to disclose his mental illness, and the failure of trial counsel to seek a mental evaluation prior to the entry of his guilty pleas. The post-conviction court summarily dismissed the petition as time-barred. In this appeal as of right, the Petitioner argues that due process concerns necessitated tolling the statute of limitations for filing his petition, and therefore the post-conviction court improperly dismissed the petition. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Nakomis Jones v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Nakomis Jones, appeals the post-conviction court’s denial of his petition for postconviction relief, arguing that he received the ineffective assistance of counsel at trial and on appeal. Following our review, we affirm the post-conviction court’s denial of post-conviction relief. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals |
