State of Tennessee v. Camelia Monique Fields
The appellant pled guilty in the Madison County Circuit Court to theft of property valued between $1,000 and $10,000. The trial court sentenced her as a Range I, standard offender to two years to be served on probation supervised by Community Corrections. On appeal, the appellant ontends that the trial court erroneously denied her request for judicial diversion. Upon review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Robert Rubin
The defendant, Robert Rubin, was convicted by a Shelby County Criminal Court jury of the first degree murder of Michael Gross. He was also convicted of the attempted first degree murder of Charles Gross, a Class A felony. The defendant is serving consecutive sentences of life for the first degree murder conviction and thirty-five years for the attempted first degree murder conviction. In this direct appeal, the defendant contends (1) that the evidence is insufficient to convict him of first degree murder, and (2) that the trial court erred in sentencing him to a thirty-five year term for attempted first degree murder and in imposing the sentences consecutively. We hold that no error has been shown, and we affirm the trial court’s judgments. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Anthony T. Robertson v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Anthony T. Robertson, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus challenging his conviction for sexual battery. The trial court issued a written order dismissing the petition and denying habeas corpus relief for failure to state a cognizable claim. The petitioner filed an untimely appeal of the written order denying his petition. Following our review of the parties’ briefs, the record, and the applicable law, we conclude that the petitioner failed to timely file his notice of appeal and therefore his appeal is dismissed. |
Lake | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Matthew Dixon v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, Matthew Dixon, appeals from the post-conviction court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief. On appeal, he argues that the denial of relief was error because he did not receive the effective assistance of counsel at trial. Following our review, we conclude that the Petitioner has not shown that trial counsel was ineffective. Consequently, we affirm the post-conviction court’s order denying post-conviction relief. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Timothy E. Higgs v. James Worthington, Warden
The Petitioner was convicted of possession of contraband in a penal institution, a Class C felony, and was sentenced to ten years as a Range III offender. He filed a petition for habeas corpus relief claiming that he did not knowingly and intelligently waive his right to counsel when he represented himself at trial and that the indictment was defective. The habeas corpus court dismissed the petition without a hearing. After a thorough review of the record and applicable law, we affirm the judgment of the habeas court. |
Morgan | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Derrick Quintero and William Eugene Hall, Jr. v. State of Tennessee
The appellants, Derrick Quintero and William Eugene Hall, Jr., were each convicted on two counts of murder during the perpetration of first degree burglary, three counts of grand larceny, one count of petit larceny and three counts of first degree burglary. They both received the death penalty for the murder of one of the victims, a life sentence for the other murder conviction, and an effective eighty year sentence for the remaining convictions. The appellants were unsuccessful in their direct appeals. See State v. Hall and Quintero, 976 S.W. 2d 121 (Tenn. 1998). Appellants filed individual pro se post-conviction petitions and simultaneously joint petitions for writ of error coram nobis. Appellants alleged various constitutional violations, including the ineffective assistance of counsel and the existence of newly discovered evidence. Following a joint hearing on the petitions the trial court denied relief. We affirm the judgments. |
Humphreys | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. George Lucas Jernigan
The defendant, George Lucas Jernigan, pleaded guilty to one count of aggravated sexual assault, one count of driving on a suspended license, and one count of reckless driving. The Bedford County Circuit Court imposed an effective six-year term to be served in the Department of Correction. The defendant now appeals, alleging that community corrections placement was a more appropriate sentence and that the trial court erroneously applied statutory enhancement factors to increase the sentence that were not found by a jury. Upon review, we affirm the judgments below. |
Bedford | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Joseph Vermeal v. State of Tennessee
A Warren County jury convicted the Petitioner of aggravated sexual battery and attempted aggravated sexual battery in separate cases, and this Court affirmed the judgments on appeal. The Petitioner filed two post-conviction petitions asserting various grounds for relief. The post-conviction court denied the petitions for post-conviction relief after a consolidated hearing. On appeal, the Petitioner alleges: (1) he was denied the right to a fair trial because a case relied upon by the trial court and on direct appeal to exclude expert testimony proffered by the Petitioner has since been overturned; and (2) he was denied the effective assistance of counsel. After a thorough review of the record and applicable law, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Warren | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Sunni Adkins
The Defendant, Sunni Adkins, pled guilty to three counts of child abuse, Class A misdemeanors, and one count of aggravated assault, a Class C felony. She was sentenced to eleven months and twentynine days for each misdemeanor and to four years for the felony to be served as a Range I standard offender. The misdemeanor sentences were ordered to be served concurrently with one another but consecutively to the felony sentence. Additionally, six months of each misdemeanor sentence was ordered to be served in confinement. On appeal, the Defendant argues that the trial court erred in sentencing her by improperly applying certain statutory enhancement factors and by denying full probation or another alternative sentence. Following our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we uphold the sentences ordered by the trial court. |
Lewis | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Sunni Adkins - Concurring
I concur in the results reached in the majority opinion. However, I would affirm the trial court because of the defendant’s failure to include the guilty plea hearing transcript in the record and the attendant presumption that the trial court’s determinations were correct. See State v. Oody, 823 S.W.2d 554 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1991) (holding trial court’s ruling presumed correct in the absence of an adequate record on appeal). |
Lewis | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
John R. Thompson v. State of Tennessee
A Bedford County jury convicted the Petitioner of seventeen crimes involving his sexual contact with three minor girls, and this Court affirmed those judgments on appeal. The Petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief alleging that he failed to receive the effective assistance of counsel. The post-conviction court denied the petition, and, after a thorough review of the record and applicable law, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Bedford | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Jackie Glenn Allen v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner pled guilty to rape and incest and agreed to allow the trial court to sentence him. After a sentencing hearing, the court imposed an effective sentence of ten and one-half years to be served in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The Petitioner appealed the sentence, and this Court affirmed. The Petitioner then filed his petition for post-conviction relief claiming that he did not receive the effective assistance of counsel and that his guilty plea was not entered knowingly or voluntarily. The post-conviction court denied the petition for post-conviction relief, and, after a thorough review of the record and applicable law, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Lincoln | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Billy Clay Browning
The Appellant, Billy Clay Browning, was convicted by a Henry County jury of one count of first degree premeditated murder and received, as provided by law, a sentence of life imprisonment. On appeal, Browning has presented two issues for our review: (1) whether the trial court abused its discretion in refusing to grant a continuance because Browning was unable to assist trial counsel with his defense; and (2) whether the evidence is sufficient to support the conviction. Following review of the record, we find no error and affirm. |
Henry | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Jennifer Lynn Stinnett
The Defendant, Jennifer Lynn Stinnett, appeals from the sentencing decision of the Marshall County Circuit Court. The Defendant was indicted for over two hundred offenses (Class D and E felonies and Class C misdemeanors) as a consequence of her scheme to unlawfully obtain prescription drugs. She subsequently pled guilty as charged. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court imposed an effective twelve-year sentence and ordered the Defendant to serve 365 days in jail, followed by probation for the remainder of her sentence. On appeal, the Defendant argues that the trial court erred in denying her request for full probation. After a review of the record, we find no error in the denial of total probation. We remand for entry of corrected judgments. |
Marshall | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Charles Michael Bean
The Appellant, Charles Michael Bean, appeals the sentencing decision of the Davidson County Criminal Court. A jury found Bean guilty of three counts of aggravated assault and two counts of reckless aggravated assault. The trial court merged the convictions for reckless aggravated assault with the three aggravated assault convictions, and a sentencing hearing was held. At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court imposed the minimum sentence of three years for each of the Class C felonies and ordered that Bean serve nine months in incarceration followed by four years of probation. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently. On appeal, Bean argues that the trial court erred in denying him a sentence of total probation. After a thorough review of the record and the briefs of the parties, we affirm. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Benjamin Brown
The defendant, Benjamin Brown, was convicted by a Shelby County Criminal Court jury of first degree felony murder in the perpetration of aggravated child abuse and aggravated child abuse. For the felony murder conviction, he was sentenced as a violent offender to life in the Department of Correction, and for the aggravated child abuse conviction he was sentenced to twenty-five years, to be served concurrently. In this direct appeal, he claims (1) that the trial court improperly allowed evidence of the defendant’s bad acts without conducting a hearing as required by Tennessee Rule of Evidence 404(b), (2) that the trial court committed plain error in allowing a state’s expert witness to testify about the victim’s cause of death without establishing a proper foundation, (3) that the court erred in failing to replace a juror who indicated she had some knowledge of one of the state’s witnesses, (4) that the trial court failed to give instructions on lesser offenses, and (5) that he is entitled to a new trial based upon prosecutorial misconduct during closing argument. We hold that although the state made an improper rebuttal argument, the error was harmless, and the remaining issues are without merit. We affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Tony Sheffa v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Tony Sheffa, appeals the Shelby County Criminal Court’s denial of post-conviction relief. On appeal, he alleges that his trial counsel was ineffective and, that because of the ineffectiveness of counsel, his pleas were not knowingly and voluntarily entered. Upon our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we conclude that the post-conviction court did not have jurisdiction to hear the petition. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Dane Lee Duckett v. State of Tennessee
Petitioner, Dane Lee Duckett, was convicted by a Cumberland County Jury of attempt to manufacture methamphetamine, possession of marijuana, driving on a revoked license, and possession of drug paraphernalia. As a result, he was sentenced to an effective sentence of six years. His convictions and sentence were affirmed on direct appeal. See State v. Dane Lee Duckett, No. E2004-02321-CCA-R3-CD, 2005 WL 2777378, at *7 (Tenn. Crim. App., at Knoxville, Oct. 26, 2005). In this appeal from the denial of post-conviction relief, Petitioner asserts that the trial court improperly dismissed his petition because he received ineffective assistance of counsel at trial. We determine that Petitioner did not receive ineffective assistance of counsel and, therefore, affirm the judgments of the post-conviction court. |
Cumberland | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Johnny Justin Postles v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, Johnny Justin Postles, appeals the Lauderdale County Circuit Court’s summary dismissal of his petition for habeas corpus relief attacking his convictions for criminal trespass, simple assault, aggravated burglary, aggravated assault, and misdemeanor theft. On appeal, he argues that he is entitled to habeas corpus relief because the court reporter failed to file verbatim records with the clerk of the court in violation of Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-14-307(a). Following a review of the record, we conclude that the Petitioner has failed to allege any ground that would render the judgments of conviction void or his sentence illegal. The judgment of the habeas corpus court summarily dismissing the petition is affirmed. |
Lauderdale | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Kenneth Ray Kilpatrick and Carrie Fay Kilpatrick
Defendant, Kenneth Ray Kilpatrick, entered a plea of guilty in case no. 6670 to one count of manufacturing marijuana in an amount not less than twenty plants nor more than ninety-nine plants, a Class C felony; one count of facilitation of possession with intent to manufacture marijuana, a Class D felony; and one count of possession of unlawful drug paraphernalia, a Class A misdemeanor. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced Defendant Kenneth Kilpatrick as a Range II, multiple offender, to concurrent sentences of six years for his Class C felony conviction, four years for his Class D felony conviction, and eleven months, twenty nine days for his misdemeanor conviction, for an effective sentence of six years. Defendant, Carrie Fay Kilpatrick, entered a plea of guilty in case no. 6670 to one count of facilitation of possession with intent to manufacture marijuana, a Class D felony, and possession of unlawful drug paraphernalia, a Class A misdemeanor. In case no. 6689, Defendant Carrie Kilpatrick entered a plea of guilty to one count of simple possession of marijuana, a Class A misdemeanor, and one count of possession of unlawful drug paraphernalia, a Class A misdemeanor. The trial court sentenced Defendant Carrie Kilpatrick as a Range I, standard offender, to three years for her Class D felony conviction, and eleven months, twenty-nine days for each misdemeanor conviction. The trial court ordered Defendant Carrie Kilpatrick to serve her sentences in case nos. 6670 and 6689 concurrently for an effective sentence of three years. On appeal, both Defendants argue that the trial court erred in denying their respective requests for alternative sentencing and ordering each Defendant to serve his or her sentence in confinement. Defendant Kenneth Kilpatrick also contends that the trial court erred in its application of enhancement factors in determining the length of his sentence. After a thorough review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Lewis | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Dawn Marie Hobbs
Defendant pled guilty to two counts of identity theft, two counts of fraud, and two counts of theft of property of $500 or less. The total effective sentence is three years with the manner of service to be determined after a sentencing hearing. Defendant also pled guilty to two failure to appear charges and was sentenced to two consecutive two year sentences, suspended by agreement. Following the sentencing hearing, the trial court ordered that Defendant serve her three-year sentence incarcerated. Defendant has appealed arguing that the trial court erred by denying her request for an alternative sentence. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Sullivan | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Shannon Alan Griffin
The defendant, Shannon Alan Griffin, was charged with two counts of attempted first degree murder, two counts of aggravated assault involving use of a deadly weapon, and two counts of aggravated assault causing serious bodily injury after twice hitting his landlord with his car. The jury found the defendant guilty of all four counts of aggravated assault but could not reach a verdict on the two counts of attempted first degree murder. The trial court merged the four aggravated assault counts into two convictions and, as to the attempted first degree murder counts, declared a mistrial and ordered a new trial. Pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Appellate Procedure 10, the defendant appeals from the trial court’s decision, arguing that he may not be retried on the attempted first degree murder counts because there did not exist manifest necessity for a mistrial and a retrial would violate the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Following our review, we affirm the trial court. |
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Neddie Mack Lawson, I
The defendant, Neddie Mack Lawson, I, was convicted of misdemeanor DUI, his third offense. On appeal, the defendant argues that because he was indicted for felony DUI, fourth offense, and because the offense was committed more than one year before the filing of the indictment, he cannot be convicted of misdemeanor DUI because the misdemeanor conviction was barred by the statute of limitations. Following our review of the parties’ briefs, the record, and the applicable law, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Claiborne | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Julius Cameron Hill
Following a July 2006 jury trial, the defendant, Julius Hill, was convicted of one count of possession of 0.5 gram or more of cocaine with intent to sell, a Class B felony, one count of possession of 0.5 gram or more of cocaine with intent to deliver, a Class B felony, and two counts of simple possession of a controlled substance, a Class A misdemeanor. The trial court merged the two felony convictions and sentenced the defendant as a Range I, standard offender, to twelve years in the Department of Correction on the felony conviction and eleven months, twenty-nine days on each misdemeanor conviction, with all sentences to be served concurrently. On appeal, the defendant contends that the evidence produced at trial was insufficient to convict him of the felony counts and that the trial court imposed an excessive sentence. After reviewing the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Bedford | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Jason D. Pillow v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Jason D. Pillow, appeals the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. In this appeal, he contends that he received the ineffective assistance of counsel at trial and on appeal and that the sentence imposed by the trial court violates the terms of Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004). Discerning no error, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Maury | Court of Criminal Appeals |
