Steve V. Walker v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus, alleging that his sentence was illegal because: (1) he was improperly sentenced as a persistent offender; (2) his sentence was improperly enhanced because he did not receive the State's notice of intent to seek enhanced punishment; (3) the record of his prior criminal convictions relied upon to sentence him was inaccurate; and (4) his counsel was ineffective. The trial court denied the Petitioner's request for habeas corpus relief, and the Petitioner appealed. Because the Petitioner has failed to allege grounds that would warrant habeas corpus relief, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. |
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Michael Danelle Harvey
|
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
In Re: Sanford & Sons Bail Bonds, Inc.
The appellant, Sanford & Sons Bail Bonds, Inc., appeals the judgment of the Hamblen County Criminal Court forfeiting $5,000 bail in the case of criminal defendant Florentino DeJesus Hernandez. Following a review of the record and the parties' briefs, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand this case for proceedings consistent with this opinion. |
Hamblen | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Jody Alan Ferguson
On November 9, 1999, the Appellant, Jody Alan Ferguson, pled guilty to nine counts of forgery in the Obion County Circuit Court and was sentenced to two years of community corrections after service of thirty days confinement in the county jail. On March 9, 2000, Ferguson pled guilty to four counts of forgery and received an effective sentence of two years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. Ferguson's placement in the community corrections program was revoked and his nine two-year sentences were ordered to be served in the Department of Correction concurrently with his March 9th sentences. On June 21, 2000, Ferguson was granted determinate release by the Department of Correction for the series of two-year sentences imposed on November 9, 1999, and March 9, 2000, and he was returned to supervised probation. On June 26, 2000, Ferguson again pled guilty to two counts of forgery and received concurrent two-year suspended sentences to be served concurrently to all outstanding sentences previously imposed. On August 28, 2001, probation violation warrants were issued against Ferguson. The warrants alleged that Ferguson had violated the following conditions: (1) failed to report to the probation officer; (2) failed to pay supervision fees; (3) failed to pay restitution and court costs; and (4) failed to perform community service work. On November 9, 2001, the trial court revoked Ferguson's probationary status and ordered him to serve the remainder of his two-year sentences in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, Ferguson does not contest the trial court's finding that he violated the terms of his probation. Rather, Ferguson argues that the trial court abused its discretion by not again placing him on probation or community corrections. After review, we find no error and affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Obion | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Terrance Burke
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. William J. Burns
William J. Burns appeals from his aggravated burglary and theft convictions. He was convicted at a jury trial in the Sevier County Circuit Court, and he is presently serving an effective fifteen-year sentence as a persistent offender for these crimes. He claims in this appeal that the evidence is insufficient to support his aggravated burglary conviction and that the lower court erred in denying his motion for a mistrial. Because we disagree, we affirm. |
Sevier | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Douglas A. Mathis
A Sullivan County jury convicted the defendant of theft over $1,000 for stealing a car. On appeal, he argues the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Sullivan | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Carl G. Dodd
|
Rhea | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Stevie Lawson
|
Hawkins | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. James Robert Wilson
Defendant, James Robert Wilson, was convicted by a Davidson County jury of first degree felony murder and especially aggravated robbery. He was ordered to serve concurrent sentences of life imprisonment for the felony murder conviction and twenty years for the especially aggravated robbery conviction. Defendant appeals his convictions and presents the following five issues for review: (1) whether the trial court erred by admitting audio taped threat evidence; (2) whether the trial court erred by denying Defendant's motion for a mistrial based on a witness's characterization of Defendant as a "robber"; (3) whether the trial court erred by denying Defendant's motion for a mistrial based on the State's comment that Defendant failed to call a witness; (4) whether the trial court erred by denying Defendant's request for a jury instruction on accomplice testimony; and (5) whether the trial court erred in failing to charge all applicable lesser-included offenses. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Charles Kirby
The appellant, Charles Kirby, was found guilty of facilitation of the sale of cocaine in the amount of .5 gram or more. He was sentenced to five years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The appellant timely filed a notice of appeal, alleging that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction. After review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Gibson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Jermaine A. Paine v. State of Tennessee
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Steven James McCain
The appellant, Steven James McCain, was convicted by a jury in the Criminal Court of Davidson County of two counts of first degree premeditated murder. He received two consecutive sentences of life imprisonment with the possibility of parole. On appeal, the appellant raises the following issues for our review: (1) whether the trial court erred in denying the appellant's "Motion to Suppress Identifications Made During an Unconstitutional Photographic Line-Up Procedure"; (2) whether the trial court erred in denying the appellant's "Motion to Suppress Defendant's Statements"; (3) whether the trial court erred in admitting the audio-tape-recorded statement of Chad Collins; (4) whether the trial court erred in overruling the defense request for a mistrial when the prosecution improperly argued that the jury should consider Chad Collins' statement as substantive evidence at trial; and (5) whether the evidence was sufficient to support his convictions. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Willie J. Miller, Jr.
|
Williamson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Steven Dalton
|
Hickman | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Ricky T. Hughes
A Davidson County Criminal Court jury convicted the defendant, Ricky T. Hughes, of facilitation of first degree felony murder, a Class A felony, and especially aggravated robbery, a Class A felony. The trial court sentenced him to consecutive sentences of twenty-five years as a standard offender for the facilitation conviction and twenty-five years as a violent offender for the aggravated robbery conviction. The defendant appeals, claiming that (1) the evidence is insufficient to support his |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Terry Norris
A Shelby County jury found the Defendant guilty of second degree murder, and the trial court sentenced him to twenty-one years incarceration. The Defendant now appeals his conviction, arguing that he received ineffective assistance of counsel at trial because (1) his counsel failed to file a motion to suppress his confession based upon a violation of the Defendant's Fourth Amendment rights; and (2) his counsel argued a theory of defense to the jury that was contrary to the Defendant's wishes and testimony. We conclude that the Defendant's trial counsel were not ineffective for failing to base the motion to suppress the Defendant's confession on a violation of the Defendant's Fourth Amendment rights. We further conclude that although the Defendant's counsel did not comply with the Defendant's wish to proceed at trial under a theory of self-defense, any error in this regard was harmless in light of the record as a whole. We therefore affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Tracy Farrell
The defendant, Tracy Farrell, appeals from his eleven drug convictions rendered by a McMinn County Criminal Court jury. On appeal he challenges the trial court's failure to grant a severance of offenses. We have determined that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion to sever offenses, and we affirm the conviction judgments. |
McMinn | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Nathan Scott Ramagos
The defendant pled guilty to one count of sexual battery, a Class E felony; one count of indecent exposure, a Class A misdemeanor; and one count of reckless aggravated assault, a Class D felony. Denying his request for probation, the trial court sentenced him as a Range I, standard offender to the maximum sentence for each offense, for an effective sentence of four years. In a timely appeal to this court, the defendant challenges his sentences, arguing that the trial court erred in its application of enhancement factors, and in failing to find any factors in mitigation. Based upon our review, we conclude that two of the three enhancement factors found applicable by the trial court are unsupported by the record, but that the remaining enhancement factor, the defendant's prior history of criminal conduct, is entitled to great weight. We further conclude that mitigating factor (1), the defendant's actions did not cause or threaten serious bodily injury, applies to the defendant's convictions for sexual battery and indecent exposure, but that it carries very little, if any, weight in mitigation. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's denial of the defendant's request for probation, and the sentences imposed in this case. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Steven L. Rauhuff
The defendant was indicted for operation of a motor vehicle after being declared an habitual offender. Following a bench trial, he was convicted of the indicted offense. In this appeal, the defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence. We affirm. |
Blount | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Charles H. Martin
The Defendant, Charles H. Martin, was convicted by a jury of aggravated assault. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced him as a Range I offender to six years in the Department of Correction. On appeal, the Defendant contends that the trial court erred in denying his motion to strike handwritten portions of the indictment. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Sevier | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. James L. McCurry
The Appellant, James L. McCurry, was convicted by a Roane County jury of one count of premeditated first degree murder and was sentenced to life imprisonment. On appeal, McCurry raises two issues for our review: (1) Whether the evidence presented at trial was sufficient to support a conviction for premeditated first degree murder; and (2) whether the trial court erred by failing to exercise its role as the thirteenth juror. After review, we find no error and affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Roane | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Scotty DeWayne Robinson
The defendant, Scotty Dewayne Robinson, pled guilty to Class D felony theft pursuant to a plea agreement recommending the imposition of a three-year sentence to be served consecutively to a federal sentence. The trial court accepted the defendant's plea of guilty and imposed the recommended sentence. In this appeal, the defendant argues the trial court improperly sentenced him. We conclude the defendant has no appeal as of right of his sentence since it was a part of a plea agreement in which the defendant waived the right to appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Felicia Joann Cannon
|
Bedford | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Ronald Eugene Rickman and William Edward Groseclose
The appellants, Ronald Eugene Rickman and William Edward Groseclose, appeal their convictions by a jury in the Shelby County Criminal Court of, respectively, first degree murder and being an accessory before the fact to first degree murder. In this appeal, appellant Groseclose presents the following issues for our consideration: (1) whether the trial court erred in failing to sever his trial from that of co-defendant Rickman; (2) whether the trial court erred in admitting at trial the former testimony of Barton Wayne Mount; (3) whether the trial court erred in excluding testimony by Gary King; and (4) whether the evidence adduced at trial is sufficient to support the jury's verdict of guilt. Appellant Rickman solely challenges the introduction at trial of Mount's former testimony. Following a careful review of the record and the parties' briefs, we remand this case to the trial court for correction of the judgments to reflect the appellants' receipt of credit for time served in the Tennessee Department of Correction prior to trial. We affirm the judgments in all other respects |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals |