Chad Hughes v. State of Tennessee
Bedford County- Pursuant to a plea agreement, the Petitioner, Chad Hughes, pled guilty to one count of criminal responsibility for the sale of a Schedule II controlled substance, and the trial court ordered the Petitioner to serve eight years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The Petitioner then filed a petition for post-conviction relief claiming he received the ineffective assistance of counsel. The post-conviction court denied relief after a hearing, and the Defendant now appeals that denial. After a thorough review of the record and applicable law, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Bedford | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Tammy Garner
A Grundy County jury convicted the Defendant, Tammy Garner, of theft of property valued at less than $500. The trial court sentenced her to serve one month in jail, followed by nine months on probation, and to pay $500 in restitution. On appeal, the Defendant claims that: (1) the evidence presented was insufficient to support her conviction; and (2) the trial court erroneously sentenced her. After a thorough review of the record and the applicable law, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Grundy | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Joseph A. Hale
A Van Buren County jury convicted the Defendant, Joseph A. Hale, of second degree murder, and the trial court sentenced him as a Range I offender to seventeen years in prison. The Defendant appeals, contending that: (1) the evidence is insufficient to sustain his conviction because he was justified in using deadly force and because he committed the killing in a state of passion produced by adequate provocation; and (2) the trial court erred when it instructed the jury, precluding it from considering voluntary manslaughter. After a thorough review of the record and applicable authorities, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Van Buren | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Devon Wiggins
A Dyer County Circuit Court jury convicted the appellant, Devon Wiggins, of two counts of selling one-half gram or more of cocaine within a drug-free school zone, and the trial court sentenced him to twenty-five years for each conviction to be served concurrently with each other but consecutively to prior sentences. The trial court also ordered the appellant to pay a five-thousand-dollar fine for each conviction. On appeal, the appellant contends that (1) Tennessee Code Annotated section 39- 17-432 (2005) violates due process and resulted in his receiving an excessive sentence; (2) the evidence is insufficient to support the convictions; (3) the trial court erred by denying his motion for a bifurcated trial; (4) the trial court erred by refusing to instruct the jury on the sale of a counterfeit substance; (5) the trial court erred by failing to instruct the jury on facilitation as a lesser included offense; (6) the trial court erred by not recusing itself; (7) the prosecutor’s closing statement was improper; and (8) the cumulative effect of the errors warrants a reversal of his convictions. Based upon the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Dyer | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Jeffrey Mckinnie v. Joe Easterling, Warden
The petitioner, Jeffrey McKinnie, appeals the dismissal of his petition for writ of habeas corpus. |
Hardeman | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Tracy Lynn Harris v. State of Tennessee
The pro se petitioner, Tracy Lynn Harris, appeals from the Carroll County Circuit Court’s denial of his motion to withdraw his guilty pleas. Following our review, we affirm the denial of the motion. |
Carroll | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Michael E. Stewart
The defendant, Michael E. Stewart, appeals as of right from his convictions by a Polk County jury of first degree premeditated murder, first degree felony murder in the perpetration of kidnapping, kidnapping, a Class C felony, and tampering with evidence, a Class C felony. The murder convictions were merged, and the defendant was sentenced to life and to eight years for the two Class C felonies, which are to be served concurrently to each other but consecutively to the life sentence, for an effective sentence of life plus eight years. The defendant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support the felony murder and kidnapping convictions and that the trial court erred in admitting evidence that the defendant was taken into custody on outstanding warrants from other charges. We affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Polk | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Walter Roby
The defendant, Walter Roby, was convicted by a Shelby County jury of reckless endangerment with a deadly weapon, a Class E felony. For his conviction, the defendant was sentenced as a Range II offender to three years incarceration. On appeal, the defendant asserts that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the conviction. Upon review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Justin Vaulx
The defendant, Justin Vaulx, appeals from the judgment of the Madison County Circuit Court removing him from community corrections and ordering him to serve his sentence in confinement. Following our review of the record, the parties’ briefs, and the applicable law, we determine no error exists in the court’s revocation of the defendant’s community corrections sentence, and thus affirm the court’s judgment. |
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. George Anthony Braddock
Appellant, George Anthony Braddock, was indicted for first degree premeditated murder for the death of his wife. Appellant was found guilty by a jury and sentenced to life in prison. On appeal, Appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence. We determine that the evidence is sufficient to support a conviction for first degree murder. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. |
Houston | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Aaron Duchesne
Following a jury trial, Defendant, Aaron Duchesne, was found guilty of theft of property valued between $10,000 and $60,000, a Class C felony. At the conclusion of Defendant’s sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced Defendant as a Range II, multiple offender, to ten years, and ordered Defendant to serve his sentence consecutively to any sentences that might be imposed in case numbers 06-05119 and 06-04963 which were pending in Shelby County at the time of the sentencing hearing. On appeal, Defendant argues that (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction; (2) the trial court failed to perform its function as thirteenth juror; and (3) the trial court erred in its sentencing determinations concerning the length of his sentence and in imposing consecutive sentencing. After a thorough review, we affirm Defendant’s theft conviction and the length of his sentence. We reverse the trial court’s imposition of consecutive sentencing and remand for entry of a judgment consistent with this opinion. |
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Christopher Tyus
The defendant, Christopher Tyus, was convicted by a Madison County jury of one count of theft over $1000. He was subsequently sentenced to three years and six months as a Range I standard offender. On appeal, the defendant challenges the sufficiency of the convicting evidence. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Abby L. Mills
The defendant, Abby L. Mills, was indicted by the Lauderdale County Grand Jury of possession of a Schedule II controlled substance, cocaine, with the intent to deliver; possession of a Schedule III controlled substance, Hydrocodone, with the intent to deliver; and possession of a Schedule VI controlled substance, marijuana, with the intent to deliver over .5 ounces. After a hearing, the trial court granted defendant’s motion to suppress evidence of items found in the defendant’s home. On appeal, the state asserts that the trial court erred in suppressing the evidence obtained as a result of a valid search warrant. Upon review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Lauderdale | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Eddie Wayne Gordon v. State of Tennessee
The state appeals the post-conviction court’s grant of post-conviction relief to the petitioner, Eddie Wayne Gordon. The state argues that the post-conviction court erroneously determined that the petitioner did not voluntarily and understandingly enter his plea of guilty to first degree murder. Upon our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we reverse the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Gibson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Louis Mayes
The Defendant-Appellant, Louis Mayes (hereinafter “Mayes”), was convicted by a Shelby County jury of first degree premeditated murder. The only issue Mayes presents for our review is whether the evidence is sufficient to support his conviction. He specifically contends that two witnesses were accomplices as a matter of law and that his conviction was based on their testimony. Finding no reversible error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Michael Matthew Landers
The defendant, Michael Matthew Landers, was convicted of driving under the influence (DUI) and driving under the influence per se, Class A misdemeanors, in the Davidson County Criminal Court. He was subsequently sentenced to concurrent terms of eleven months and twenty-nine days, four days of which was to be served in the county jail. On appeal, the defendant contends that the trial court erred by failing to instruct the jury with regard to the defense of necessity. Following review of the record, we agree with the defendant that the facts of the case, when viewed in the light most favorable to the defendant, support such a charge. As such, we reverse the convictions and remand the case for a new trial. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Mario Andre McElrath
The defendant, Mario Andre McElrath, was convicted of the attempted sale of .5 grams or more of cocaine within one thousand feet of a school zone. On direct appeal, this court found plain error in the trial court’s imposition of a ten-year, Range I sentence for a Class B felony and remanded for resentencing for a Class C felony. State v. Mario Andre McElrath, No. W2006-02621-CCA-R3-CD, 2007 WL 4245723 (Tenn. Crim. App. Dec. 3, 2007). On resentencing, the trial court imposed a sentence of four years for a Class C felony for a violation of the Drug Free School Zone Act (DFSZA). In this appeal as of right, the defendant argues that the exemption from increased incarceration provided in Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-17-432(b)(3) should apply to the release eligibility provision of section -432(c). Following our review, we conclude that the exemption does not apply to the release eligibility provision and affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Obion | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Daniel Earl Williams
A Madison County jury convicted the defendant, Daniel Earl Williams, of one count of driving under the influence, first offense, a Class A misdemeanor, one count of violation of the implied consent law, a Class A misdemeanor, one count of violation of the registration law, a Class C misdemeanor, and one count of violation of the open container law, a Class C misdemeanor. Following trial, the defendant submitted to having seven prior driving under the influence offenses and was convicted of driving under the influence, eighth offense, a Class E felony. The trial court sentenced the defendant as a Range I offender to serve two years in the custody of the Department of Correction. The defendant’s sole issue on appeal is that the evidence produced at trial was insufficient to support his felony conviction. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Antonio Arnold v. State of Tennessee
The pro se petitioner, Antonio Arnold, appeals as of right the Shelby County Criminal Court’s summary dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. The post-conviction court dismissed the petition based upon its finding that the petition did not contain sufficient and specific factual bases in support of his claim for relief. Following our review, we reverse the judgment of the post-conviction court and remand the case for an evidentiary hearing. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Henry Lee Hawkins, Jr. v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Henry Lee Hawkins, Jr., appeals from the Shelby County Criminal Court’s denial of his petition for post-conviction relief from his convictions on four counts of aggravated robbery and effective sentence of 34 years in the Department of Correction. On appeal, the petitioner argues that he received the ineffective assistance of counsel at trial. After reviewing the record, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Andrew Michael Rodriguez
A Hardeman County grand jury indicted the defendant, Andrew Michael Rodriguez, for one count of rape of a child, a Class A felony. The defendant entered a best interest plea to one count of sexual battery by an authority figure, a Class C felony, with an agreed sentence of six years as a Range I, standard offender. The manner of service of the sentence was left to the discretion of the trial court. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court denied the defendant’s request for judicial diversion, probation, or other alternative sentencing and ordered the defendant’s sentence to be served in the custody of the Department of Correction. In this appeal as of right, the defendant argues that the trial court erred in denying his request for probation or alternative sentencing. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Hardeman | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Nabeeh Jameel Mateen
The defendant, Nabeeh Jameel Mateen, was convicted by a Davidson County Criminal Court jury of especially aggravated robbery, a Class A felony, and was sentenced by the trial court to forty years as a Range II, multiple offender. On appeal, the defendant contends that the evidence is not sufficient to support his conviction and that the trial court erred in sentencing regarding an enhancement factor and a mitigating factor. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Betsy B. Hull
The Defendant-Appellant, Betsy B. Hull (“Hull”) appeals the revocation of her probation by the Circuit Court for Fayette County. She contends that the trial court erred in denying her motion to continue and in its decision to revoke her probation. Discerning no error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Fayette | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Anthony Drake
Upon his pleas of guilty, the Defendant, Anthony Drew Drake, was convicted of one count of burglary of a building other than a habitation (a Class D felony), eight counts of burglary of an automobile (Class E felonies) and six counts of misdemeanor theft. Sentencing was left to the discretion of the trial court. Following a sentencing hearing, the Defendant was sentenced as a Range II, multiple offender to terms of five years for the Class D felony and three years for each Class E felony conviction. Three of the three-year sentences were ordered to be served concurrently with one another and consecutively to the five-year sentence. Two of the remaining three-year sentences were ordered to be served concurrently with one another and consecutively to the five-year and three-year consecutive sentences, for an effective sentence of eleven years. On appeal, the Defendant argues that the trial court erred by refusing to allow him to serve his sentences in community corrections. We affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Marshall | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Barry Singleton
The defendant, Barry Singleton, appeals his convictions for aggravated kidnapping and aggravated rape. The defendant was sentenced to twelve years as a Range I, standard offender for the aggravated kidnapping conviction and to twenty-five years as a violent offender for the aggravated rape conviction. The sentences were ordered to run consecutively for an effective sentence of thirtyseven years. On appeal, he contends that: the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions; the trial court erred in allowing the State to introduce photographs into evidence that had not been provided to the defense prior to trial; it was error to allow a witness not provided to the defendant to testify; it was error to allow the victim to testify without providing the tape recording of her initial statement to police; and the court erred in imposing his sentence with regard to both the length and manner. After careful review, we affirm the judgments from the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals |
