State of Tennessee v. Matthew DeLoss Larsen and Andrew Lee Matthews
The defendants, Matthew DeLoss Larsen and Andrew Lee Matthews, were indicted for aggravated robbery and aggravated assault. Pursuant to negotiated plea agreements, the defendants pled guilty |
Sumner | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Jerry W. Jordan
The Defendant, Jerry W. Jordan, was convicted of second degree murder in the Criminal Court of Davidson County. After a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced the Defendant as a Range I offender to twenty-two years of imprisonment. In his appeal as of right pursuant to Rule 3(b) of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure, the Defendant argues that (1) the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support a verdict of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, (2) the Defendant’s Due Process and Equal Protection rights were violated when the State excluded four African-American jurors, (3) the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury as to reckless homicide as a lesser-included offense, and (4) the trial court erred in sentencing the Defendant to twenty-two years. We reverse the Defendant’s second degree murder conviction due to the trial court’s failure to instruct the jury regarding reckless homicide as a lesser-included offense to first degree murder. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Jerry W. Jordan - Concurring and Dissenting
I agree with the majority opinion in all respects except for the failure to charge the lesser included offense. Although I agree with the majority’s conclusion that the failure to charge reckless homicide was error, I would find the failure to charge the lesser offense harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Stephanie Renae Person
A Madison County jury convicted the Defendant of misdemeanor theft of property, and the trial court sentenced her to eleven months and twenty-nine days of incarceration. The judgment of the trial court specified that the Defendant must serve seventy-five percent of the sentence prior to eligibility for work release, furlough, trusty status, and rehabilitative programs. The Defendant now appeals, challenging both the sufficiency of the evidence and the sentence that was imposed. Finding that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction and that the sentence was properly imposed, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Terry Jerome Thomas
Following a trial, a Hamilton County jury convicted the defendant of rape, and the trial court sentenced him to ten years imprisonment. In this appeal, the defendant alleges (1) the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction, and (2) his sentence was excessive. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Timothy Clark Newson
The defendant, Timothy Clark Newson, appeals from his conviction for aggravated kidnapping, contesting the sufficiency of the evidence. We affirm the judgment of conviction. |
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Linda G. Robison
The defendant, Linda G. Robison, appeals from the revocation of her probation. She contends that her probation expired before the revocation warrant issued, thereby divesting the trial court of the power to revoke her probation. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Coffee | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Evelyn Elissa Duckett
The defendant was indicted for robbery and convicted of misdemeanor theft, for which she was sentenced to eleven months and twenty-nine days, and payment of restitution, with the defendant to serve thirty percent of the sentence. She timely appealed, arguing that the entire sentence should have been probated. Based upon our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Blount | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Roshaun Colbert v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Roshaun Colbert, appeals the trial court's denial of his petition for post-conviction relief, claiming that he received the ineffective assistance of counsel. He contends that he pled guilty because his attorney guaranteed him that he would be released from prison after serving only five years of his twenty-year effective sentence. We affirm the trial court's denial of the petition. |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Joseph Hough v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner's first post-conviction petition was dismissed in 1996, the petitioner, apparently, having been released from custody before the hearing and not appearing at the hearing to testify. Back in custody, at some point, he filed in 2000 a motion to reopen his petition, which was denied. He then filed an untimely appeal from that dismissal and proceeded, on appeal, as if the motion had been granted and the issues were those raised in his 1996 petition. Based upon our review, we conclude that the appeal should be dismissed because it was untimely. |
Hamblen | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Derrick Bryant
The defendant, Derrick Bryant, was convicted of first degree premeditated murder. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-202(a)(1). The jury sentenced him to life imprisonment with the possibility of parole. In this appeal of right, the defendant asserts that the trial court erred by (1) failing to suppress his confession; (2) denying his last requested continuance; (3) accepting transfer of the case from the juvenile court; and (4) excluding evidence of the victim's reputation for violence. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. |
Hamblen | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Charles L. Debuty
The defendant pled guilty in the Blount County Circuit Court to four charges of theft and one charge of automobile burglary. The court sentenced him to an aggregate sentence of four years, with seven months in jail, and the balance to be served on intensive probation. In this appeal as of right, the defendant argues that the trial court imposed an excessive amount of incarceration. After careful review of the record, we affirm the defendant's sentence but remand for entry of a corrected judgment in No. C-12607. |
Blount | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. John T. Blacksmith
The defendant, John Blacksmith, appeals his Davidson County Criminal Court jury conviction of second-offense driving while under the influence of an intoxicant (DUI). He claims (1) that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury's conclusion that, while intoxicated, he was in physical control of an operable motor vehicle and (2) that the trial court erred in refusing to grant a mistrial when a state's witness introduced inadmissible evidence that besmirched the defendant's character. We discern no reversible error and affirm the trial court's judgment. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Robert Earl Johnson
The defendant, Robert Earl Johnson, was convicted of first-degree murder and sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole. In this appeal, Defendant argues insufficiency of the evidence, improper investigative procedures by the police, errors by the trial court regarding admissibility of evidence and jury instructions, improper comments by the prosecutor during closing argument, sentencing errors, and ineffective assistance of counsel. After a review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Randall Lloyd Hill
On July 18, 1997, the Defendant, Randall Lloyd Hill, was convicted of one count of incest. After a sentencing hearing, the trial court imposed a sentence of five years to be served in the Department of Correction. In this appeal as of right, the Defendant argues that (1) his incest conviction subjected him to double jeopardy, (2) he was convicted solely on uncorroborated accomplice testimony, (3) the trial court erred in allowing inappropriate opinion testimony from a child abuse investigator, and (4) the Defendant was prejudiced by the prosecutor's improper comments regarding the Defendant's decision not to testify. Because we conclude that the prosecutor improperly commented on the Defendant's election not to testify, we reverse the Defendant's conviction and remand the case for a new trial. |
Cheatham | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Carl F. Neer
The defendant, Carl F. Neer, pleaded guilty in the Anderson County Criminal Court to a fourth-offense possession of marijuana, a Schedule VI controlled substance, and attempted to appeal a certified question of law. Because we are constrained to conclude that he has not properly presented his certified question, we dismiss the appeal. |
Anderson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Alonzo Chatman
Alonzo Chatman appeals the Knox County Criminal Court's revocation of his probationary sentence. Because the lower court did not abuse its discretion in revoking probation and ordering the original sentence into execution, we affirm. |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Kristine Kuhne
The defendant pled guilty in the Blount County Circuit Court to assault, a Class A misdemeanor, and was sentenced to eleven months and twenty-nine days. The trial court ordered a split confinement with thirty days in jail, and the balance to be served on probation. In this appeal as of right, the defendant argues that the trial court erred in denying her full probation. After careful review, we affirm the defendant's sentence but remand the matter to the trial court for entry of a corrected judgment. |
Blount | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
David Zirkle v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner was convicted by a Sevier County jury of first degree murder and especially aggravated robbery. The Petitioner was sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder conviction and to twenty-five years incarceration for the especially aggravated robbery conviction. The Petitioner appealed, and the convictions were affirmed by our Court. The Petitioner then filed for post-conviction relief, which was denied by the trial court. The Petitioner now appeals the trial court's denial of post-conviction relief, arguing that he received ineffective assistance of counsel at trial. Concluding that the Petitioner received effective assistance of counsel, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Sevier | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Joe W. Coonrod
A Bedford County jury convicted the defendant of Class D felony theft over $1,000, and the trial court sentenced him to 12 years incarceration as a career offender. In this appeal, the defendant alleges the evidence is insufficient to sustain his conviction. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Bedford | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Timothy D. Grove
The defendant, Timothy D. Grove, appeals his conviction for aggravated assault and ten-year Range II sentence in the Department of Correction. Specifically, the defendant contends evidence presented against him at trial was insufficient to support his conviction, and his sentence was excessive. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Eric Jonathan Benefield
Eric Jonathan Benefield appeals the Hamilton County Criminal Court's imposition of consecutive sentencing. In the proceedings below, the trial court incorrectly determined that because the defendant was on probation at the time of his offenses, consecutive sentencing was required by Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 32(c)(3). However, consecutive sentencing was merely permissible, not mandatory. We therefore reverse the trial court's consecutive sentencing determination and remand for further consideration under the applicable law. |
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Anthony S. Carie
The defendant, Anthony S. Carie, appeals his bench trial convictions for burglary of a building other than a habitation and theft over $1,000. This case presents three issues for our determination: (1) whether the evidence was sufficient to support the defendant's convictions; (2) whether the trial court erred in not examining the defendant in open court regarding his right to testify; and (3) whether the defendant received effective assistance of counsel at trial. For the reasons set forth below, we conclude there is no reversible error; therefore, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Williamson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Henry B. Bason
The defendant, Henry B. Bason, appeals from his conviction for disorderly conduct, contesting the sufficiency of the evidence. We affirm the judgment of conviction. |
Blount | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Ricky D. Gardner
The defendant, Ricky D. Gardner, was convicted of one count of vandalism over $500; one count of vandalism over $1,000; three counts of burglary; one count of burglary of a motor vehicle; three counts of theft over $1,000; two counts of theft under $500; and one count of theft over $500. The trial court imposed an effective six-year sentence to be served in a community corrections program. Later, the trial court revoked the alternative sentence and ordered the defendant to serve the balance of his sentence in the Department of Correction. In this appeal of right, the defendant argues that the trial court erred by ordering revocation. The judgments are affirmed. |
Loudon | Court of Criminal Appeals |
