Christopher Lee Shaw v. State of Tennessee
Christopher Lee Shaw, Petitioner, appeals the Davidson County Criminal Court’s denial of post-conviction and error coram nobis relief from his convictions of possession of more than twenty-six grams of cocaine with the intent to sell or deliver within a drug-free zone, evading arrest while operating a motor vehicle, and possession of drug paraphernalia, for which he received an effective sentence of fifteen years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, Petitioner contends that he is entitled to post-conviction relief because he was denied the effective assistance of counsel. Specifically, he contends that trial counsel failed to: (1) adequately investigate Adrian Wilkerson; (2) obtain funds to retain a fact investigator to investigate Mr. Wilkerson and an expert witness in undercover narcotics investigations; (3) inform Petitioner that two additional witnesses made out-of-court identifications of Petitioner driving the white Nissan SUV; (4) file a pretrial motion to suppress a suggestive single photographic identification and tainted in-court identification; and (5) ensure a unanimous jury verdict for Petitioner’s conviction in Count 1 of the |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Thomas N. Allen v. Shawn Phillips, Warden
The pro se petitioner, Thomas N. Allen, appeals the denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus by the Lake County Circuit Court, arguing the trial court erred in summarily dismissing the petition. The petitioner asserts his indictment was defective for failing to cite the correct statutory provision, the trial court erred by giving erroneous jury instructions, and the indictment was illegally amended during trial, entitling the petitioner to habeas corpus relief. Following our review, we affirm the habeas court’s dismissal of the petition as the petitioner has failed to show he is entitled to relief. |
Lake | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Shane Todd
After a consolidated jury trial, the defendant, Shane Todd, was convicted of three counts of rape of a child and two counts of solicitation of a minor in case numbers 19425 and 19450. Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 39-13-522, -528. On appeal, the defendant argues the trial court erred in denying his motion for a new trial, claiming the jury was exposed to improper outside influence. The defendant also contends the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions and the trial court’s sentencing determinations resulted in an excessive forty-year sentence. Upon our review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court but note, in sentencing the defendant in case number 19450, the trial court interchanged the sentence terms on the judgment forms for counts one and two as ordered at the sentencing hearing. Therefore, we remand the case to the trial court for the entry of amended judgment forms as to counts one and two in case number 19450. |
Gibson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Krystal Gail Jenkins
The Defendant, Krystal Gail Jenkins, appeals the trial court’s revocation of her probation, arguing that the court abused its discretion in not considering all alternative sentences to incarceration and ordering her to serve the balance of her original sentence in the Department of Correction. After thorough review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Bradley | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Ladarius Lockhart
The Defendant, Ladarius Lockhart, was convicted of two counts of rape. The trial court merged the convictions and imposed a nine-year sentence. On appeal, the Defendant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support the convictions and that the prosecutor made improper statements during closing arguments. Upon reviewing the record, the parties’ briefs, and the applicable law, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
James Dellinger v. State of Tennessee
Petitioner, James Dellinger, appeals the trial court’s summary dismissal of his petition seeking to invalidate the sentence of death imposed for his conviction of first degree murder. The petition sought error coram nobis relief pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-26-105, asserted that his sentence of death is an illegal sentence to be corrected pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 36.1, and that he is entitled to relief by “any other remedy that at common law exists.” After review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Blount | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Markeith Chapale Pulliam
The Defendant, Markeith Chapale Pulliam, appeals the trial court’s revocation of his community corrections sentence, arguing that the court abused its discretion both in revoking his community corrections and ordering him to serve the balance of his sentence in the Department of Correction. After thorough review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Ralph Ray v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, Ralph Ray, appeals the Bradley County Criminal Court’s denial of his petition for post-conviction relief from his 2016 conviction for second degree murder and his twenty-five-year sentence. The Petitioner contends that he received the ineffective assistance of counsel. We affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Bradley | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Granvil Johnson
A Davidson County jury convicted the Defendant, Granvil Johnson, of evading arrest, and the trial court sentenced the Defendant to eleven years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the Defendant contends that the trial court abused its discretion when it sentenced him and that he received the ineffective assistance of counsel at his sentencing hearing. After a thorough review of the record and applicable law, we affirm the trial court’s judgment. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Donte Lavon Green
The Defendant, Donte Lavon Green, was charged with narcotics offenses after drugs were discovered during a “protective sweep” of his motel room and subsequently seized pursuant to a search warrant. The trial court denied the Defendant’s motion to suppress the evidence, and a jury convicted him of possession with intent to sell 0.5 grams or more of cocaine, possession with intent to deliver 0.5 grams or more of cocaine, possession with intent to sell 14.175 grams or more of marijuana, possession with intent to deliver 14.175 grams or more of marijuana, and possession of drug paraphernalia. The Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence and the denial of his motion to suppress. After a thorough review of the record, we conclude that the evidence is sufficient to support the convictions and that the Defendant is not entitled to the suppression of the evidence, which was seized pursuant to a search warrant not challenged on appeal. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s judgments. |
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Anterrio Chambers
The Defendant, Anterrio Chambers, was convicted of attempted first degree murder, two counts of aggravated assault, reckless endangerment, and employment of a firearm during the commission of or attempt to commit a dangerous felony. He received an effective thirty-one-year sentence. On appeal, the Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his convictions, the trial court’s failure to charge misdemeanor reckless endangerment as a lesser-included offense of attempted first degree murder, and the trial court’s imposition of partial consecutive sentences. Upon reviewing the record and the applicable law, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Mike Settle v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, Mike Settle, appeals the trial court’s dismissal of his petition for writ of error coram nobis in which he challenged his 2001 guilty plea for especially aggravated kidnapping. Because coram nobis relief is not available to challenge guilty pleas, we affirm the trial court’s judgment pursuant to Court of Criminal Appeals Rule 20. |
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Eric Dewayne Wallace
The Defendant, Eric Dewayne Wallace, appeals the Shelby County Criminal Court’s dismissal of his motion to correct an illegal sentence. The State has filed a motion requesting that this court affirm the lower court’s denial of relief pursuant to Rule 20 of the Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals. Because the Defendant has failed to establish that his sentence is illegal, we conclude that the State’s motion is well-taken. Accordingly, we affirm the summary dismissal of the motion. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. David Mack Brewer
Defendant, David Mack Brewer, was indicted by the Hardin County Grand Jury with one count of DUI per se, one count of DUI, and one count of possession of a loaded handgun while under the influence of an intoxicant. Defendant filed a motion to suppress all “evidence, specifically including any alcohol test results, firearm, statements and field sobriety tasks results, acquired, observed and/or seized by any and all law enforcement officers, . . . by means of a warrantless entry, search, seizure and arrest of the Defendant’s person, breath, acts, conduct, statements and vehicle . . . on April 26, 2016.” An evidentiary hearing was held. The trial court narrowed the issues during the hearing to the sole issue of whether there was an unlawful warrantless arrest. The trial court determined that the warrantless arrest for the misdemeanor of DUI was unlawful and granted the motion to suppress on that basis. The State subsequently announced it could not prosecute without the evidence which had been suppressed and moved to dismiss the indictment as a result of the suppression ruling. The trial court dismissed the charges, and the State filed a timely notice of appeal of the trial court’s suppression of the evidence. After oral argument and the review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we reverse the judgment of the trial court, reinstate the indictment, and remand for further proceedings in the trial court. |
Hardin | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Michael Scott Bickford
Defendant, Michael Scott Bickford, appeals from the trial court’s denial of his motion for correction of his sentence pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 36.1. Because Defendant voluntarily pled above his range, his sentence is not illegal. Therefore, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Lawrence | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Jerry Lewis Tuttle v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, Jerry Lewis Tuttle, appeals the Maury County Circuit Court’s summary dismissal of his pro se petition for post-conviction relief as previously determined and/or failing to state a colorable claim. In this appeal, the State concedes, and we agree, that the Petitioner stated a colorable claim for relief. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the post-conviction court and remand for appointment of counsel. |
Maury | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Marvin Green
The Defendant, Marvin Green, pleaded guilty to three drug-related offenses in exchange for an effective sentence of fifteen years. The Defendant appealed but his direct appeal was dismissed for failure to file an appellate brief. See Marvin Green v. Jerry Lester, Warden, No. W2013-025250-CCA-R3-HC, 2014 WL 2941237, at *1 (Tenn. Crim. App., at Jackson, June 26, 2014) (citing Marvin Green v. State, No. E2008-00182-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App., at Knoxville, Aug. 29, 2008) (order)), perm. app. denied (Tenn. Nov. 19, 2014). After numerous unsuccessful post-conviction petitions, on December 18, 2017, the Defendant filed a motion to correct an illegal sentence, alleging that his plea agreement was not voluntarily entered. The trial court denied the motion for failure to state a cognizable claim. On appeal the Defendant maintains that his guilty plea was involuntary. After review, we affirm the trial court’s judgment. |
Sullivan | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Malcolm Wade Frazier
Defendant, Malcolm Wade Frazier, pleaded guilty to one count of possessing more than 0.5 grams of methamphetamine with intent to deliver after the trial court’s denial of Defendant’s motion to suppress. Defendant received an eight-year sentence. Pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 37, Defendant attempted to reserve two certified questions of law. Because the certified questions fail to identify the scope and limits of the legal issue reserved, we conclude that we are without jurisdiction to consider this appeal, and therefore it is dismissed. |
Van Buren | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
David Wi v. State of Tennessee
Petitioner, David Wi, pled guilty to aggravated burglary, felony murder, attempted first degree felony murder, attempted first degree premeditated murder, conspiracy to commit first degree murder, and aggravated assault in exchange for a sentence of life plus twenty-five years. Petitioner subsequently filed a petition for post-conviction relief and alleged that he received ineffective assistance of counsel and that his guilty pleas were not knowing and voluntary. The post-conviction court denied relief. After a review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court on the issues of ineffective assistance of counsel and the knowing and voluntary nature of Petitioner’s guilty plea. However, we must reverse Petitioner’s conviction for attempted first degree felony murder and dismiss Count Five of the indictment because Count Five of the indictment fails to state an offense. |
Montgomery | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Juan A. Hill v. State of Tennessee
Petitioner, Juan A. Hill, appeals from the summary dismissal of his fourth petition for writ of habeas corpus relief. Petitioner was convicted in March, 1996, of one count of rape of a child. The trial court sentenced Defendant to 35 years in confinement. On appeal, Petitioner asserts that the judgment of conviction is void because he was convicted of a crime that was not in effect at the time of the offense. Following our review, we affirm the dismissal of the petition. |
Johnson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Michael Austin
The Defendant, Michael Austin, was convicted by a Shelby County Criminal Court jury of aggravated robbery, a Class B felony; convicted felon in possession of a firearm, a Class C felony; and driving with a revoked, suspended or cancelled license, a Class A misdemeanor. The trial court sentenced the Defendant as a Range I, standard offender to eight years for the aggravated robbery conviction, three years for the firearm conviction and six months for the driving conviction and ordered that the felony sentences be served consecutively to each other, for a total effective sentence of eleven years in the Department of Correction. On appeal, the Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the convicting evidence for his felony convictions and argues that the trial court erred in ordering consecutive sentences. Following our review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Chew Cornelius Sawyer
The Defendant, Chew Cornelius Sawyer, was convicted by a Madison County Circuit Court jury of aggravated assault, a Class C felony; attempted aggravated burglary, a Class D felony; and convicted felon in possession of a firearm, a Class C felony, and was sentenced to an effective term of five years in the Department of Correction. On appeal, he challenges the sufficiency of the convicting evidence. After review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
LaGerald Johnson v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, LaGerald Johnson, appeals the Shelby County Criminal Court’s denial of his petition for post-conviction relief from his convictions of one count of aggravated assault, three counts of domestic assault, and one count of harassment and resulting effective six-year sentence. On appeal, he contends that he received the ineffective assistance of trial counsel, which resulted in his guilty pleas being involuntary. Based upon the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Brandon Otis Johnson
Defendant, Brandon Otis Johnson, appeals from the trial court’s revocation of his probation. Defendant argues that the trial court improperly relied on hearsay evidence without making the required findings of reliability and good cause justifying its admission over his objections. After a full review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Kristie Lea Crafton
Kristie Lea Crafton, Defendant, was sentenced to drug court after she violated the terms of probation. After she was expelled from drug court, the trial court revoked her probation and ordered Defendant to serve her sentence in confinement. We affirm. |
Williamson | Court of Criminal Appeals |
