COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OPINIONS

State vs. Marvin Matthews
02C01-9806-CR-00195

Shelby Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Burton Welch
02C01-9807-CC-00222

Lake Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Taurys Walls
02C01-9601-CR-00019

Shelby Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Eddie Coley
01C01-9707-CC-00270

Williamson Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Eddie Coley
01C01-9707-CC-00270

Williamson Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Danny King
01C01-9710-CR-00487
Trial Court Judge: Thomas H. Shriver

Davidson Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. George Kelly
01C01-9610-CC-00448
Trial Court Judge: Charles D. Haston, Sr.

Warren Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Larry Dixon
01C01-9802-CC-00085
Trial Court Judge: John H. Gasaway, III

Robertson Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Johnny Davidson
01C01-9707-CC-00290

Maury Court of Criminal Appeals

Evid., And Mcdaniel v. Csx Transportation, Inc., 955 S.W.2D 257 (Tenn. 1997). The
03C01-9707-CC-00270
Trial Court Judge: Donald P. Harris

Williamson Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Griffis
03C01-9708-CR-00358
Trial Court Judge: E. Eugene Eblen

Court of Criminal Appeals

Collier vs. State
03C01-9709-CR-00388

Knox Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Bidwell
03C01-9710-CC-00470
Trial Court Judge: J. Curtis Smith

Rhea Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs Ricky Bryan
01C01-9704-CC-00136

Rutherford Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Rachel Green
01C01-9706-CR-00223

Davidson Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Bivens
03C01-9711-CR-00497

McMinn Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Martin
03C01-9711-CR-00508
Trial Court Judge: James E. Beckner

Greene Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Sweat
03C01-9708-CC-00348
Trial Court Judge: D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.

Blount Court of Criminal Appeals

X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
X2010-0000-XX-X00-XX
Trial Court Judge: Earle G. Murphy

McMinn Court of Criminal Appeals

State of Tennessee vs. Edward Anthony Joslin
01C01-9710-CR-00491
Authoring Judge: Judge John H. Peay
Trial Court Judge: Judge Seth Norman

A jury found the defendant guilty of conspiracy to possess with the intent to deliver over seventy pounds of marijuana; two counts of possession with the intent to deliver one-half ounce to ten pounds of marijuana; and delivery of ten pounds, one gram to seventy pounds of marijuana. The trial court imposed an effective sentence of thirtynine years incarceration, with a total fine of one hundred sixty thousand dollars ($160,000). On appeal, the defendant presents ten issues for review, most of which deal with the sufficiency of the convicting evidence or the propriety of the defendant’s sentence. We affirm the defendant’s convictions and sentence.

Davidson Court of Criminal Appeals

State of Tennessee vs. Michael Orman
01C01-9710-CR-00498
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Judge Cheryl Blackburn

The defendant was found guilty by a Davidson County jury of burglary and theft of property over $1,000. The trial court sentenced defendant to Range II sentences of six years on each count and ordered them served consecutively for an effective twelve-year sentence. The defendant contends that the trial court erred in finding and weighing the enhancement and mitigating factors and in ordering the sentences served consecutively instead of concurrently. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the sentence as imposed.

Davidson Court of Criminal Appeals

Terry L. Baker vs. State of Tennessee
01C01-9711-CR-00522
Authoring Judge: Judge John H. Peay
Trial Court Judge: Judge Seth Norman

The petitioner pled guilty to six counts of drug charges in Davidson County case number 92-A-647 on May 16, 1995. He was sentenced as a Range I offender to concurrent ten year sentences to be served in the Community Corrections program. On January 19, 1996, the petitioner was found guilty of violating his community corrections sentence and the court increased his sentence from ten years to twenty years to serve. On December 11, 1996, the petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief. The petition was dismissed by the trial court on the grounds that it was filed outside the applicable statute of limitations. The petitioner now appeals and argues the postconviction court erred when it dismissed the petition. We agree and reverse the judgment of the court below and remand this cause for a hearing on the merits of the petition.

Davidson Court of Criminal Appeals

Timothy R. Powell vs. State of Tennessee
01C01-9708-CR-00379
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Judge Frank G. Clement

The Defendant, Timothy R. Powell, appeals as of right from the order of the trial court summarily dismissing his second petition for post-conviction relief. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Davidson Court of Criminal Appeals

Billie Joe Linticum vs. State of Tennessee - Concurring
03C01-9710-CR-00458
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Judge Stephen M. Bivel

The petitioner was convicted by a jury of first degree murder in 1975 and sentenced to death. This Court affirmed the conviction, but the sentence was commuted to life imprisonment by executive action. Hamilton v. State, 555 S.W.2d 724 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1977).

Hamilton Court of Criminal Appeals

State of Tennessee vs. Cecil Eugene McGuire
03C01-9705-CC-00191
Authoring Judge: Judge Curwood Witt
Trial Court Judge: Judge Rex Henry Ogle

The Sevier County Grand Jury indicted sixteen-year old Cecil Eugene McGuire for aggravated rape, aggravated sexual battery, and aggravated burglary. After a trial, the jury acquitted the defendant of aggravated rape and aggravated burglary but found him guilty of aggravated sexual battery and aggravated criminal trespass, a lesser grade offense of aggravated burglary. The trial court sentenced him to serve eleven years in the custody of the Department of Correction as a Range I, standard offender for the Class B felony, concurrently with eleven months and twenty-nine days for the Class A misdemeanor. Pursuant to Rule 3 of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure, the defendant presents the following issues:


1. Whether the indictments are fatally defective and thereby deprive the trial court of jurisdiction in this case.
2. Whether the evidence as a matter of law was insufficient to support the convictions.
3. Whether the trial court improperly credited and weighed the enhancement factors and imposed an excessive sentence.

After a careful review of the record and the applicable law, we find no error warranting reversal of the defendant’s convictions. We affirm the convictions, but for reasons explained below, we modify the felony sentence from eleven years to ten years.

Sevier Court of Criminal Appeals