Alfonzo Williams v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, Alfonzo Williams, appeals from the Shelby County Criminal Court’s denial of post-conviction relief from his conviction for second degree murder and sentence of twenty years in the Department of Correction. The Petitioner argues that he received the ineffective assistance of counsel at trial in failing to object to the trial court’s self-defense jury instruction, failing to request a supplemental instruction, failing to object to the trial court’s answer in response to a jury question, and failing to raise the issue in his motion for new trial. He also argues that he received the ineffective assistance of appellate counsel because counsel did not address these issues on appeal. We conclude that the Petitioner failed to prove that his counsel was ineffective. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Orlando Smith
The Defendant-Appellant, Orlando Smith (“Smith”), appeals the revocation of his probation and community corrections sentences by the Madison County Circuit Court. He contends that the trial court abused its discretion in revoking both of his alternative sentences. Following our review, we find no abuse of discretion. Accordingly, the orders of the trial court are affirmed. |
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Willie Douglas Johnson
A Knox County Criminal Court jury convicted the defendant, Willie Douglas Johnson, of attempted second degree murder, two counts of aggravated assault, and three counts of unlawful possession of a weapon. After merging the aggravated assault convictions into the conviction of attempted second degree murder and the weapon possession charges into a single conviction, the trial court imposed consecutive sentences of 25 years for attempted second degree murder and six years for unlawful possession of a weapon. In this appeal, the defendant asserts that the trial court erred by ruling that the State would be permitted to impeach his testimony through the use of prior felony convictions and that the trial court erred by enhancing his sentence on the basis that he showed no hesitation in committing the crimes when the risk to human life was high. Discerning no error, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Sam Avery Wilhoite
The defendant, Sam Avery Wilhoite, was indicted on ten counts of forgery involving five forged checks. A Bedford County Circuit Court jury convicted him of eight counts of forgery and lesserincluded charges on two of the counts. The trial court merged five of the counts, including the lesser-included convictions, with the five other counts and sentenced the defendant to an effective term of eight years in the Department of Correction. On appeal, he challenges the sufficiency of the evidence and the sentence imposed by the trial court. After review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Bedford | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Marcie Lynn Pursell
The Defendant, Marcie Lynn Pursell, aka Marcie Pursell Frazier, was indicted in the Davidson County Criminal Court for three counts of aggravated child abuse. Thereafter, the Davidson County Juvenile Court concluded that the State had not proved allegations, in a dependent and neglect petition, that the defendant had injured her child or allowed the child to be injured. The defendant sought to dismiss the felony child abuse charges in criminal court on collateral estoppel grounds. The trial court denied her motion. The trial court and this Court granted her Rule 9 application for an interlocutory appeal. Following our review of the record, the judgment of the Davidson County Criminal Court finding that the State was not collaterally estopped from pursuing criminal prosecution against the defendant is affirmed. This case is remanded to the trial court for further proceedings. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Jecory J. Leonard
The appellant, Jecory J. Leonard, pled guilty in the Montgomery County Circuit Court to facilitation of second degree murder and facilitation of attempted first degree murder, Class B felonies. The plea agreement provided that the length and manner of service of the sentences would be determined by the trial court. Following a sentencing hearing, the appellant was sentenced to concurrent sentences of ten years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the appellant challenges the |
Montgomery | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Bryant D. Millen v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Bryant D. Millen, appeals the post-conviction court’s denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. On appeal, he asserts that he received the ineffective assistance of counsel. Specifically, he argues that his trial counsel was ineffective in failing to interview and investigate witnesses. He further asserts that trial counsel failed to impeach the testimony of a witness with a prior inconsistent statement. After a thorough review of the record and the parties’ briefs, the judgment of the post-conviction court denying post-conviction relief is affirmed. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Michael Vincent Ricco
The defendant was convicted by jury of rape of a child and aggravated sexual battery. He was |
Henderson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Christopher Anderson
The defendant, Christopher Anderson, was convicted by a Shelby County jury on one count of aggravated burglary, a Class C felony, and two counts of aggravated robbery, Class B felonies. The defendant received sentences of three years for aggravated burglary and eight years for each count of aggravated robbery to be served concurrently in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the defendant raises the following issues: (1) whether the trial court erred in denying the defendant’s motion to sever his cases from the cases of his co-defendant; (2) whether the trial court erred in denying the defendant’s motion for judgment of acquittal as to Count III, charging aggravated robbery; (3) whether the evidence presented at the trial was sufficient to support the defendant’s convictions; and (4) whether the trial court erred in excluding defense counsel’s inquiry on cross-examination of the co-defendant regarding bias. Upon review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Cris R. Woods
The defendant, Cris R. Woods, appeals his conviction by a jury in the Criminal Court for Union County for reckless endangerment, a Class E felony. He contends that the evidence was insufficient to convict and that the trial court improperly denied his motion for acquittal. We agree and reverse the judgment of the trial court, and we vacate the conviction. |
Union | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Glenn Eugene Armes
Defendant, Glenn Eugene Armes, presents for review a certified question of law pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 37(b)(2). Defendant entered a plea of guilty to arson and simple possession of a controlled substance. The trial court sentenced defendant to nine years for arson and eleven months and twenty-nine days for simple possession to be served consecutively. As a condition of his guilty plea, defendant properly reserved a certified question of law as to whether he was subjected to an unconstitutional traffic stop. After a review of the record, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Roane | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Talmadge Wayne Bradley
Appellant, Talmadge Wayne Bradley, pled guilty in Lawrence County to one count of possession of a Schedule III substance with intent to sell. The trial court held a separate sentencing hearing. At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court determined that enhancement factor (14), abuse of a position of public trust applied to appellant. Appellant was sentenced to four years, one year to be served in incarceration and the remainder to be served on probation. Appellant appeals arguing |
Lawrence | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Raymond Carlton
The defendant, Raymond Carlton, was convicted by a Shelby County Criminal Court jury of felony murder, premeditated first degree murder, attempted especially aggravated robbery, attempted first degree murder, and attempted aggravated robbery. The trial court merged the two murder convictions and sentenced the defendant to life imprisonment plus twenty-two years. On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred in allowing questions concerning his prior convictions and arrests, and he challenges the sufficiency of the convicting evidence. Following our review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Bert Newby
The defendant, Bert Newby, was convicted of one count of first degree murder, and one count of aggravated assault, a Class C felony. He was sentenced to consecutive sentences of life for the first degree murder charge and three years for the aggravated assault. The defendant raises three issues for appeal: 1) whether the late-filed notice of appeal should be waived in the interest of justice and judicial economy; 2) whether the trial court erred in consolidating the indictments for trial; and 3) whether the evidence was sufficient to support his murder conviction. After careful review, we conclude that no reversible error exists and affirm the judgments from the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Brandon Johnson
The defendant, Brandon Johnson, was convicted by a Shelby County jury of first degree felony murder and second degree murder for shooting a man to death during an attempted robbery. The trial court merged the second degree murder conviction into the felony murder conviction, for which the defendant received a life sentence. In a timely appeal to this court, the defendant raises the following issues: (1) whether the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress his statement to police; (2) whether the trial court erred in granting the State’s motion for a sequestered jury; (3) whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain the convictions; and (4) whether the cumulative effect of the various alleged errors deprived him of his constitutional rights to a fair trial. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Donald Mays v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Donald Mays, appeals the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. The petitioner has previously been granted a remand to the post-conviction court for consideration of the issues that he now appeals: (1) whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to allege in his motion for new trial that the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury on robbery as a lesser included offense of aggravated robbery; and (2) whether appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to raise on appeal that it was plain error for the trial court not to instruct on robbery as a lesser included offense of aggravated robbery. After careful review, we affirm the judgment from the post conviction court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. John Brunner
The defendant, John Brunner, was convicted by a Shelby County Criminal Court jury of second degree murder and domestic assault. He was sentenced as a Range I, violent offender to concurrent terms of twenty-three years, six months and eleven months, twenty-nine days. On appeal, he argues that (1) the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction for second degree murder; (2) the trial court erred in admitting the victim’s eviction letter to the defendant into evidence; (3) the trial court imposed an excessive sentence; (4) the trial court erred by failing to merge the domestic assault conviction with the second degree murder conviction; and (5) cumulative error entitles him to relief. After our review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Phillip Gray Stewart
The Defendant, Phillip Gray Stewart, was convicted in the Franklin County Circuit Court of driving under the influence, second offense. The trial court sentenced the Defendant to eleven months and twenty-nine days, with forty-five days to be served in the county jail. In this direct appeal, the Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the convicting evidence. Following a review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Franklin | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Marlos Shields
The defendant, Marlos Shields, was indicted on charges of aggravated robbery and aggravated burglary. After a jury trial, the defendant was convicted of the charged offenses. The trial court imposed a sentence of twelve years for the aggravated robbery conviction and six years for the aggravated burglary conviction and ordered the sentences to run consecutively for an effective sentence of eighteen years in the Department of Correction. On appeal, the defendant argues that: (1) the trial court erred in denying the defendant’s motion for a mistrial; (2) the evidence was insufficient to sustain his convictions; and (3) the trial court erred in imposing an excessive sentence. Following our review of the parties’ briefs, the record, and the applicable law, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Carlos Cooper
The defendant, Carlos Cooper, appeals from the judgment of the Madison County Circuit Court, revoking his probation and reinstating his original sentence of eight years. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the court. |
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Marvin Anthony Matthews v. Henry Steward, Warden
The petitioner, Marvin Anthony Matthews, appeals the lower court’s denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus. The state has filed a motion requesting that this court affirm the lower court’s denial of relief pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals. We grant the state’s motion and affirm the judgment of the lower court. |
Lauderdale | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. William Harold Jones, Alias
The Defendant, William Harold Jones, appeals the revocation of his enhanced probation sentences in the Criminal Court for Knox County. He pled guilty to two charges of theft, a Class D felony, for which he received two consecutive, suspended sentences of four years; theft, a Class E felony, for which he received a consecutive suspended sentence of three years; and reckless endangerment, a Class E felony, for which he received a suspended sentence of two years, with a total effective sentence of eleven years of enhanced probation as a Range II, multiple offender. On appeal, the Defendant contends the trial court erred in revoking his probation and ordering him to serve his sentences in confinement. We affirm the trial court. |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
William M. Putnam v. Ricky Bell, Warden
The pro se petitioner, William M. Putman, challenges the summary dismissal of his petition for writ of habeas corpus. Following our review, we affirm the dismissal of the petition. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Taurus Merriweather
The Defendant-Appellant, Taurus Merriweather (“Merriweather”), was convicted by a Shelby County Criminal Court jury of second degree murder and was subsequently sentenced to twenty-five years in confinement. Merriweather’s sole issue on appeal is whether the evidence was sufficient to establish his identity as the shooter in this case. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Johnny L. Burns
The Defendant, Johnny L. Burns, was originally tried and convicted of one count of selling less than .5 grams of cocaine within 1000 feet of a school, a Class B felony. Due to an error in jury instructions, this Court reversed and remanded his case for a new trial. See State v. Johnny L. Burns, No. M2005-01945-CCA-R3-CD, 2007 WL 595632, (Tenn. Crim. App., Nashville, Feb. 26, 2007). The Defendant was retried and again convicted of one count of selling less than .5 grams of cocaine within 1000 feet of a school. In this appeal, he contends that the trial court erred because it: (1) denied his request for supplementary police reports that he claims contain exculpatory information; (2) refused to admit into evidence a photograph used by the defense in cross-examination; (3) denied his motion for a mistrial due to improper remarks made by the prosecutor during closing argument; and (4) failed to instruct the jury on the lesser-included offense of attempted sale of less than .5 grams of cocaine within 1000 feet of a school. After our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals |
