State of Tennessee v. Sidney Eugene Watkins
The Defendant, Sidney Eugene Watkins, was convicted by a jury of alternative counts of |
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Joe G. Manley v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, Joe G. Manley, appeals from the Fayette County Circuit Court’s denial of |
Fayette | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Aaron Dodson v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner-Appellant, Aaron Dodson, appeals the denial of post-conviction relief from his convictions of first-degree felony murder, especially aggravated robbery, and aggravated kidnapping. The Petitioner asserts that he received ineffective assistance of counsel and that the post-conviction court erred in limiting proof at the post-conviction hearing to only alleged errors of trial counsel.1 After review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Clinton D. Braden
In February of 2021, Defendant, Clinton D. Braden, pleaded guilty to burglary and |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Alexander Carino v. State of Tennessee
Petitioner, Alexander Carino, appeals from the Trousdale County Circuit Court’s dismissal of his second petition for writ of habeas corpus. He alleges that the habeas corpus court erred by summarily denying his petition without advising him of his right to counsel or appointing counsel and that his judgments for second-degree murder are void because the affidavits of complaint were not “properly authenticated” because they did not contain a court seal. Petitioner further alleges for the first time on appeal that the affidavits of complaint contain an insufficient factual basis to support a finding of probable cause. Following our review of the entire record and the briefs of the parties, we affirm the judgment of the habeas corpus court. |
Trousdale | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Isiah J. Primm
Defendant, Isiah J. Primm, was convicted after a jury trial of two counts of first degree felony murder; two counts of conspiracy to commit first degree murder, a Class A felony; and one count of conspiracy to commit voluntary manslaughter, a Class D felony; and sentenced to an effective life plus forty years in confinement. On appeal, Defendant argues that (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions; (2) the jury should have been instructed on self-defense, facilitation, and attempt as lesser-included offenses of first degree murder; (3) the jury should have been instructed on the State’s duty to gather and preserve evidence; (4) the State committed a Brady violation by waiting until the morning of trial to provide Defendant with a copy of Mr. Tidwell’s cell phone report; (5) the State knew or should have known that one of the victims introduced false testimony; (6) the trial court should have excluded evidence of drugs found in the apartment where Defendant was staying; (7) Defendant’s Fourteenth Amendment right was violated because the jury venire contained no African American jurors; and (8) the trial court erred by imposing partial consecutive sentencing. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgments of the trial court; however, because the trial court did not sign three of the judgments, we remand the case for entry of amended judgments. |
Dickson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Charles Claybrooks v. State of Tennessee
Petitioner, Charles Claybrooks,1 appeals the dismissal of his 2021 petition seeking postconviction |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Robert Garner v. State of Tennessee
In this consolidated appeal, the Petitioner, Robert Garner, appeals from the Giles County Circuit Courts’ summary denial of his petition for relief pursuant to the Post-Conviction Fingerprint Analysis Act of 2021 (Fingerprint Act) and his petition for a writ of error coram nobis. We affirm the judgments of the post-conviction and coram nobis courts. |
Giles | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Brendan Nathan Morgan
Following a bench trial, the Defendant, Brendan Nathan Morgan, was convicted in the |
Decatur | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Cadarius Head
A Shelby County jury convicted the Defendant, Cadarius Head, of first degree |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Cory Edward Walden
After pleading guilty to two counts of violation of the habitual motor vehicle offender law and reckless endangerment, Defendant was sentenced to a total of eight years and six months on supervised probation. Several probation violation warrants, a partial revocation, and additional convictions followed, eventually culminating in a hearing on the revocation of Defendant’s probation. Defendant admitted the violations. The trial court ultimately determined that Defendant’s multiple probation violations warranted the complete revocation of probation. After a review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Lincoln | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Reginold C. Steed v. State of Tennessee
Petitioner, Reginold C. Steed, appeals the error coram nobis court’s summary dismissal of |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Patsy Hensley
Defendant, Patsy Hensley, was convicted of first-degree premeditated murder and received |
White | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Carrie Joann Hamlin
The Defendant, Carrie Joann Hamlin, was convicted by a McMinn County Circuit Court |
McMinn | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Tavares Tobin
Following convictions for unlawful possession of a weapon and a felony drug offense, the
|
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Sharrad Sharp v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, Sharrad Sharp, appeals from the Shelby County Criminal Court’s denial of |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Roosevelt Pitts, III
In this delayed appeal, the Defendant-Appellant, Roosevelt Pitts, III, challenges his |
Rutherford | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Michael White v. Martin Frink, Warden
In 2005, Petitioner, Michael White, was convicted of multiple counts of rape. He was sentenced to an effective sentence of 55 years. After several failed attempts, Petitioner again sought habeas corpus relief, which the habeas court denied. He appeals. Because Petitioner failed to follow the statutory procedure for filing a petition for habeas corpus relief, we affirm the summary dismissal of the petition.
|
Trousdale | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Jeffrey Cochran
The Defendant, Jeffrey Cochran, was convicted by a McMinn County Criminal Court jury of aggravated kidnapping, for which he is serving a nine-year sentence. See T.C.A. § 39- 13-304(a)(5) (2018). On appeal, he contends that (1) the trial court erred in denying, in part, his motion to suppress, (2) the trial court erred in denying his motion for a continuance, (3) the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction, and (4) his sentence is excessive. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
McMinn | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Mustafah Brummell
A Davidson County jury convicted the Defendant-Appellant, Mustafah Brummell, of two counts of aggravated robbery, for which he received an effective sentence of twenty-eight years’ imprisonment. On appeal, the sole issue presented for our review is whether the evidence is sufficient to support his convictions. We affirm.
|
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Rodger E. Broadway v. State of Tennessee
Rodger E. Broadway, Petitioner, sought relief from his 2003 convictions for first degree felony murder, especially aggravated robbery, and aggravated rape, which were the result of guilty pleas, claiming that trial counsel told him he could not file for post-conviction relief and that the trial court deprived him of his fundamental right to represent himself. The post-conviction court found that the petition was not timely filed and that Petitioner was not entitled to due process tolling and summarily dismissed the petition. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm. |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
William E. Blake, Jr. v. State of Tennessee
William E. Blake, Jr., Petitioner, claims that he is entitled to post-conviction relief because he received ineffective assistance of counsel and because the jurors in his trial were not impartial and were influenced by their fear of the victim’s family. Following a hearing on the merits, the trial court dismissed the Petition. Discerning no error, we affirm. |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Timothy Curtis Greenman
A Lincoln County jury convicted the Defendant, Timothy Curtis Greenman, of three counts of sexual exploitation of a minor more than 100 images and one count of sexual exploitation of a minor more than fifty images, and the trial court sentenced him to a total effective sentence of thirty years of incarceration. On appeal, the Defendant contends that: (1) the trial court erred when it denied his motion to suppress; (2) the evidence is insufficient to sustain his convictions; (3) the trial court erred when it denied his motion for new trial; and (4) the trial court erred when it sentenced him. After review, we affirm the trial court’s judgments.
|
Lincoln | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Priscilla A. Barnett
A Madison County jury convicted the Defendant, Priscilla Ann Barnett, of one count of first degree premediated murder, one count of felony murder during the perpetration of aggravated child abuse, and two counts of aggravated child abuse. The trial court merged the murder convictions and imposed an effective sentence of life imprisonment. On appeal, the Defendant contends that (1) the evidence is insufficient to support her convictions; (2) the trial court erred in denying her request for funds to retain a mental health expert; and (3) the trial court erroneously imposed consecutive sentences. After review, we affirm the trial court’s judgments. |
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Michelle Shoemaker v. Stanley Dickerson, Warden
The Petitioner, Michelle Shoemaker, is appealing the trial court’s summary dismissal of her habeas corpus petition. After reviewing the parties’ briefs and the record on appeal, the court finds that this is an appropriate matter for affirmance under Court of Criminal Appeals Rule 20. |
Lauderdale | Court of Criminal Appeals |