COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OPINIONS

State vs. James D. Brazelton
M1999-02477-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Cheryl A. Blackburn
The appellant, James D. Brazelton, was convicted by a jury in the Davidson County Criminal Court of one count of possession of marijuana, over 10 pounds but less than 70 pounds, with the intent to deliver, a class D felony. The trial court sentenced the appellant, as a Range II offender, to seven years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The appellant raises the following issues for our review: (1) whether the jury's verdict was supported by the evidence; and (2) whether the sentence imposed by the trial court was excessive. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. James Edward Cowan
M1999-02572-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: J. Randall Wyatt, Jr.
Defendant was convicted by a Davidson County jury of attempted first degree murder, attempted especially aggravated robbery, and especially aggravated burglary. At sentencing his conviction for especially aggravated burglary was reduced to aggravated burglary. He was sentenced as a Range II offender to thirty-six years for the Class A felony of attempted first degree murder, sixteen years for the Class B felony of attempted especially aggravated robbery, and eight years for the Class C felony of aggravated burglary. The attempted first degree murder and attempted especially aggravated robbery sentences were run consecutively to each other, and the aggravated burglary sentence ran concurrently, for an effective fifty-two year sentence. In this appeal, defendant makes the following allegations: (1) the trial court erred in refusing to suppress the bullet which was removed from defendant during surgery; (2) the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction for attempted first degree murder; (3) his separate convictions for attempted first degree murder and aggravated burglary violate due process since they were incidental to attempted especially aggravated robbery; and (4) the trial court erred in determining the length and consecutive service of his sentences. Upon our review of the record we conclude the trial court properly admitted the bullet removed from the defendant; the evidence was sufficient to sustain defendant's conviction for attempted first degree murder; there was no due process violation; and defendant was properly sentenced. Thus, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

State vs. Melissa Stearns
M1999-1826-CCA-R3-CD
Trial Court Judge: Timothy L. Easter
The appellant, Melissa Ann Stearns, pled guilty in the Williamson County Circuit Court to one (1) count of reckless endangerment, a Class E felony, and one (1) count of evading arrest, a Class E felony. The trial court sentenced the appellant as a Range I offender to concurrent terms of two (2) years for each offense, suspended after service of thirty (30) days in the Williamson County Jail. On appeal, the appellant contends that the trial court erred in ordering her to serve thirty (30) days in jail. After thoroughly reviewing the record before this Court, we hold that, due to the seriousness of the offenses committed by the appellant, the trial court did not err in denying full probation. Therefore, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

State vs. Charles Ricky Deason
M2000-00497-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: John H. Gasaway, III
The appellant, Charles Ricky Deason, pled guilty in the Montgomery County Circuit Court to one count of driving under the influence (hereinafter "DUI"), seventh offense; one count of leaving the scene of an accident; one count of driving on a revoked license, fourth offense; one count of DUI, second offense; and two counts of misdemeanor assault. The trial court sentenced the appellant to eleven months and twenty-nine days incarceration in the Montgomery County Jail for DUI, seventh offense. The trial court also sentenced the appellant to thirty days incarceration for leaving the scene of an accident, to be served concurrently with the sentence for DUI, seventh offense. Additionally, the trial court sentenced the appellant to an eleven month and twenty-nine day suspended sentence for driving on a revoked license, fourth offense, and ordered this sentence to be served consecutively to the DUI, seventh offense, and leaving the scene of an accident. The trial court further sentenced the appellant to eleven months and twenty-nine days incarceration, with ninety days to be served in incarceration and the remainder suspended, for the DUI, second offense, and ordered this sentence to be served consecutively to the DUI, seventh offense, and leaving the scene of an accident, and consecutively to the driving on a revoked license, fourth offense. Finally, the trial court sentenced the appellant to eleven months and twenty-nine days probation for each of the assault convictions and ordered these sentences to be served concurrently with each other, but consecutively to the other sentences. Subsequently, the appellant violated his probation by driving on a revoked license, violating the Light Law, and improper vehicle registration. The trial court revoked the appellant's probation and ordered the appellant to serve the remainder of his sentence in incarceration. The appellant presents the following issue for our review: whether the judgment of the trial court compelling the appellant to serve the full balance of his sentences in confinement was supported by the evidence. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. ThomasLawrence and Joseph Hatton
M2000-00493-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: W. Charles Lee
The appellant, Thomas Lawrence, was convicted by a jury in the Marshall County Criminal Court of one count of possession of cocaine with intent to sell, a class C felony, and one count of possession of drug paraphernalia, a class A misdemeanor. The trial court sentenced Lawrence, as a Range II offender, to eight years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction for the possession of crack cocaine conviction and assessed a $2000 fine. The trial court further sentenced Lawrence to eleven months incarceration in the Marshall County Jail for the possession of drug paraphernalia conviction. The trial court ordered Lawrence to serve these sentences concurrently. The appellant, Joseph Hatton, was convicted by a jury in the Marshall County Criminal Court of two counts of selling crack cocaine, a class C felony, one count of possession of crack cocaine with the intent to sell, a class C felony, and one count of possession of drug paraphernalia, a class A misdemeanor. The trial court sentenced Hatton, as a Range I offender, to four years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction for each sale of crack cocaine conviction and four years incarceration for the possession of crack cocaine with the intent to sell conviction. The court assessed a total of $4250 in fines. The trial court further ordered Hatton to serve his sentences for selling crack cocaine concurrently with each other but consecutive to the sentence for possession of crack cocaine with the intent to sell.

State of Tennessee v. Michael Brady
II-798-239-A
Trial Court Judge: Timothy L. Easter

X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
Trial Court Judge: William Charles Lee

State vs. Scarlett Rose Bender
M2000-1070-CCA-R3-CD
Trial Court Judge: Allen W. Wallace
The Defendant pleaded nolo contendere to possessing with the intent to sell or deliver over one hundred pounds of marijuana, which is a Class B felony. Sentencing was left to the discretion of the trial court. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial judge sentenced the Defendant to eight years in the Department of Correction. On appeal, the Defendant argues that she should have been sentenced as an especially mitigated offender and that she should have been allowed to serve her sentence on probation. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Warner Powell and Charlie Stokes
M1999-00661-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Robert W. Wedemeyer
This is an appeal as of right by the State of Tennessee, which argues that the trial court erred by suppressing the evidence obtained against the Defendants pursuant to a search warrant. The State asserts that the trial court incorrectly concluded that the search warrant was invalid because the agent who provided the information in the affidavit establishing probable cause to search did not have the authority to execute the warrant or arrest the Defendants. In response, the Defendants assert that the State's notice of appeal was not timely filed, and they argue that the evidence was properly suppressed because the agent did not have the authority to obtain or execute the search warrant and because the affidavit did not establish the veracity of the confidential informant. We conclude that the State's notice of appeal was not timely filed, but we will consider the appeal in the interest of justice. We further conclude that the search warrant was valid; thus the trial court erred by suppressing the evidence obtained pursuant to the warrant. Accordingly, the trial court's order suppressing the evidence is reversed, and this case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

State vs. Roderick Johnson
M1999-00605-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: J. Randall Wyatt, Jr.
A Davidson County jury convicted defendant of second degree murder. In this appeal as a matter of right, defendant challenges only the sufficiency of the evidence upon which the jury based his conviction. Our review of the record reflects sufficient evidence to support the jury's finding. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs.Robert Lewis Herrin
M1999-00856-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: W. Charles Lee
The appellant, Robert Lewis Herrin, pled guilty in the Marshall County Circuit Court to one count of theft of property worth one thousand dollars ($1,000) or more but less than ten thousand dollars ($10,000), a class D felony. The trial court sentenced the appellant as a Range I offender to three years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction, suspending all but 120 days of the appellant's sentence and granting him supervised probation for a term of ten years. As a special condition of probation, the trial court prohibited the appellant from engaging in "any type [of] construction business or solicitation for business." In this appeal, the appellant argues that the trial court erred in imposing this special condition of probation. Following a review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court as modified.

State vs. Bobbie Joe Rollins
M1999-02457-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: W. Charles Lee
The defendant was convicted by a Marshall County jury of reckless aggravated assault and sentenced by the trial court to ten years imprisonment as a Range III offender. In this appeal as a matter of right, the defendant claims the conflict between the trial court's erroneous written jury instruction requiring proof of venue in "Lincoln County," and the oral instruction requiring proof of venue in "Marshall County," requires reversal. After a through review of the record, we conclude that the issue has been waived. Furthermore, regardless of waiver, any error in the written jury instruction was clearly harmless. Therefore, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Richard C. Silk
M1999-02526-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: J. Steve Daniel
The appellant, Richard C. Silk, was convicted by a jury in the Rutherford County Circuit Court of one count of resisting arrest, a class B misdemeanor. The trial court sentenced him to six (6) months incarceration in the Rutherford County Jail, assigning a service percentage of seventy-five percent (75%). The appellant now presents the following issues for our review: (1) whether the evidence adduced at trial is sufficient to support the appellant's conviction of resisting arrest; (2) whether the trial court erred in sustaining certain objections by the State to the appellant's testimony concerning a statement made to him by an arresting officer; and (3) whether the trial court erred in sentencing the appellant. Following a thorough review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Connie Easterly
M2000-00077-CCA-R10-CO
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Robert Steven Bebb

State vs. Bernard Jerome Jones
M2000-00018-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Cheryl A. Blackburn
The defendant was convicted by a Davidson County jury of possession with intent to sell or deliver 0.5 grams or more of cocaine. The trial court sentenced defendant to 16 years incarceration as a Range II multiple offender. In this appeal as a matter of right, defendant makes the following allegations of error: (1) the evidence was insufficient to support a finding of guilt; (2) the trial court erred by ruling that if defendant testified, the state could impeach his credibility by introducing defendant's prior drug convictions; and (3) the trial court erred in sentencing defendant to 16 years incarceration. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. William Lewis Houston
M1999-01430-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Jim T. Hamilton
Defendant was convicted by a Giles County jury of eight drug offenses and one count of aggravated assault. He received an effective sentence of seventy-two years. In this appeal, the defendant makes the following allegations: (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions; (2) the trial court committed plain error by consolidating all nine indictments for trial; (3) the process of selecting the jury venire was unconstitutional; (4) the trial court improperly limited the defendant's cross-examination of the undercover agent; (5) the trial court erred by admitting into evidence transcripts of certain tape recorded conversations and failed to properly instruct the jury concerning the transcripts; and (6) the trial court erred in its sentencing determinations. We conclude the trial court improperly sentenced the defendant and reduce the sentences to an effective term of forty-six years. The judgments of the trial court are affirmed in all other respects.

State vs. Lori A. Little
M1999-0858-CCA-R3-CD
Trial Court Judge: Walter C. Kurtz
The Defendant, Lori A. Little, was convicted of two counts of forgery, both Class E felonies. In this appeal as of right, she argues (1) that the trial court improperly denied her the court's subpoena power prior to trial; (2) that the evidence was insufficient to support her convictions; (3) that the trial court improperly instructed the jury regarding NationsBank's obligations under the Uniform Commercial Code to reimburse customers for forgeries paid out of customers' accounts; (4) that the trial court improperly limited cross-examination of a prosecution witness regarding his bias; (5) that the jury was improperly tainted or biased by contact between a witness and a juror who were acquaintances; and (6) that the trial court intimidated the Defendant in a jury-out hearing during her direct examination at trial. We find no reversible error; thus, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Elizabeth Davis
E1999-00373-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Robert E. Cupp
The appellee, Elizabeth Davis, was indicted by a Unicoi County Grand Jury on November 20, 1995, for four counts of theft of property. On March 2, 1999, the State submitted a motion to the trial court to amend the indictment to correct the dates of the offenses set forth in all counts of the indictment and to reduce the value of the money alleged stolen in Count Four of the indictment. Following a hearing, the trial court denied the State's motion, whereupon the State requested the entry of an order of nolle prosequi as to all counts of the indictment. Instead, at the appellee's request, the trial court dismissed the indictment with prejudice pursuant to Tenn. R. Crim. P. 48(b). The State now brings this appeal as of right challenging both the trial court's dismissal of the indictment with prejudice and the trial court's denial of its motion to amend the indictment. Following a review of the record and the parties' briefs, we reverse the order of dismissal and remand this case for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

State vs. Elizabeth Davis
E1999-00373-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Robert E. Cupp
The appellee, Elizabeth Davis, was indicted by a Unicoi County Grand Jury on November 20, 1995, for four counts of theft of property. On March 2, 1999, the State submitted a motion to the trial court to amend the indictment to correct the dates of the offenses set forth in all counts of the indictment and to reduce the value of the money alleged stolen in Count Four of the indictment. Following a hearing, the trial court denied the State's motion, whereupon the State requested the entry of an order of nolle prosequi as to all counts of the indictment. Instead, at the appellee's request, the trial court dismissed the indictment with prejudice pursuant to Tenn. R. Crim. P. 48(b). The State now brings this appeal as of right challenging both the trial court's dismissal of the indictment with prejudice and the trial court's denial of its motion to amend the indictment. Following a review of the record and the parties' briefs, we reverse the order of dismissal and remand this case for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

State vs. James Christopher Lewis
E1999-00802-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: R. Jerry Beck
The defendant entered an Alford plea to one count of attempted rape and two counts of sexual battery. He received a sentence of eight years as a Range II offender for the attempted rape and two years, as a Range I offender, for each of the sexual battery charges. All sentences were to be served concurrently. The defendant's request for a suspended sentence was denied after a lengthy hearing, and he raises that denial as the sole issue on appeal. Based upon our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Larry Burks
E1999-00571-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: J. Curtis Smith
The mobile home, which was the residence of the defendant and his wife, was searched, pursuant to a search warrant, and certain illegal substances were found. The defendant filed a motion to suppress, contesting the adequacy of the description of the place to be searched. Following a hearing on the motion and the trial court's upholding the validity of the search warrant, the defendant entered a plea of guilty to a drug offense, reserving as certified questions of law the adequacy of the portion of the search warrant describing the place to be searched and whether the search warrant sufficiently established the reliability of the confidential informant. Based upon our review, we affirm the finding of the trial court that the description of the premises was adequate. Our consideration of the second certified question of law is waived because this issue was not pursued on appeal.

State vs. Samuel Wayne Loveday
E1999-01090-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Ray L. Jenkins
The defendant, who was convicted of attempted aggravated rape, aggravated sexual battery, and aggravated assault, appealed these convictions, presenting as issues whether the out-of-court showup identification of the defendant was impermissibly suggestive and whether the subsequent in-court identification was tainted as a result. Based upon our review, we conclude that these issues are without merit and, thus, affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Larry E. Scales
M1998-00142-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Gary R Wade
Trial Court Judge: Charles D. Haston, Sr.
The defendant, Larry E. Scales, appeals his conviction of theft over $500 and his six-year sentence as a career offender. Because the trial court erroneously instructed the jury on the possible range of punishment, the judgment is reversed and the defendant is granted a new trial.

State vs. Robert C. Copas
M1999-00841-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry Smith
Trial Court Judge: Jane W. Wheatcraft
The defendant, Robert C. Copas, was indicted by a Sumner County Grand Jury for one count of aggravated rape. After discovering that the recording of the defendant's preliminary hearing was inaudible, the defendant moved to dismiss the indictment and remand for a new preliminary hearing pursuant to rule 5.1 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure. Following a hearing, the trial court did not dismiss the indictment, but remanded for a new preliminary hearing. The state then moved to dismiss the indictment, arguing that case law requires dismissal of the indictment under these circumstances. The court agreed and dismissed the indictment but the state then brought this appeal. Because the trial court's dismissal of the indictment and remand for a new preliminary hearing was an appropriate remedy for a violation of the Tenn. R. Crim. P. 5.1 (a) the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

State vs. Justin Victory
M2000-00015-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Sr. Judge L. Terry Lafferty
Trial Court Judge: Steve R. Dozier
The defendant, Justin Victory, entered a plea of guilty to the offense of aggravated burglary before the Davidson County Criminal Court. Pursuant to the plea agreement, the defendant was to receive a sentence of four (4) years, with the manner of service to be determined by the trial court. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court denied the defendant's request for an alternative sentence and ordered the defendant to serve the sentence in the Davidson County CCA. Also, the trial court advised the defendant that upon completion of the Life Lines Substance Abuse Program, the trial court would suspend the balance of the sentence and determine proper restitution. In this appeal of right, the defendant complains that the trial court erred in denying him supervised probation. After a review of the record, the briefs of parties and applicable law, we modify the manner of the service of the defendant's sentence to 214 days incarceration with the remainder served on supervised probation.