COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OPINIONS

State vs. Cecil L. Groomes, et al
M1998-00122-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Donald P. Harris
The defendants were convicted in Williamson County of especially aggravated robbery from an incident occurring at the Cool Springs Mall. Defendant Akins was sentenced to twenty years and fined $1,000, while defendant Groomes was sentenced to twenty-two years and fined $4,000. Both timely appealed, raising as issues whether Akins should have been transferred from juvenile court and tried as an adult, whether the prosecutor improperly excused a potential juror and made prejudicial statements in closing argument, whether the court properly instructed the jury, whether the evidence was sufficient, whether the victim's family and friends had improper contact with the jurors, and whether the defendants received appropriate sentences. Based upon our review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

State vs. Frederick Gonzalez
M1999-00165-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Henry Denmark Bell
The Defendant appeals as of right from his conviction of simple possession of cocaine. He argues that the trial court erred in failing to suppress the evidence used to convict him because the evidence was the fruit of an unlawful seizure. We agree; accordingly, we reverse the Defendant's conviction and dismiss the case against him.

Tommy Ray Warren vs. State
M1999-1319-CCA-R3-PC
Trial Court Judge: Jim T. Hamilton
On April 12, 1993, the petitioner, Tommy Ray Warren, pled guilty in the Wayne County Circuit Court to two counts of first degree murder. The trial court imposed a life sentence for each count of murder and further ordered consecutive service of the life sentences. The petitioner subsequently filed a petition for post-conviction relief, alleging that his guilty pleas were not knowing and voluntary because he was not aware that his possible mental retardation could render him ineligible for the death penalty. The petitioner also alleged that trial counsel's failure to pursue a mental retardation hearing constituted ineffective assistance of counsel. The post-conviction court dismissed the petition, finding that the petitioner's pleas were knowing and voluntary and that the petitioner had received effective assistance of counsel. The petitioner now appeals the court's denial of relief. Following a review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

State vs. James Ellison Rouse
M1999-01807-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Jim Travis Hamilton
The defendant was convicted of two counts of first degree murder and two counts of attempted first degree murder as the result of a shooting spree at Richland High School. The defendant, then seventeen, was tried and convicted as an adult, and sentenced to two consecutive life without the possibility of parole terms plus fifty years. The additional fifty-year term is modified to forty-two years. We affirm the two consecutive life without the possibility of parole terms holding that if a jury unanimously finds the existence of at least one aggravating circumstance beyond a reasonable doubt, then in its considered discretion, the jury may sentence the defendant to either life imprisonment or life without the possibility of parole absent a showing of "gross abuse of discretion."

State vs. David B. Gardner
M1999-02337-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: John H. Gasaway, III
The Defendant was indicted for seven counts of forgery. He was subsequently tried by a Robertson County jury and found guilty of all counts, and the trial court sentenced him as a career offender to an effective sentence of twenty-four years. In this appeal as of right, the Defendant argues that the trial court erred by concluding that the evidence establishing venue was sufficient to support his convictions and by sentencing him improperly. We hold that the State carried its burden of proving venue by a preponderance of the evidence and that the trial court properly sentenced the Defendant. Accordingly, we affirm the conviction.

State vs. Anthony David Tapp
M1999-00414-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Gary R Wade
Trial Court Judge: James K. Clayton, Jr.
The defendant, Anthony David Tapp, was convicted of vehicular homicide as a result of intoxication. The trial court imposed a Range I sentence of 10 years. In this appeal of right, the defendant contends that the trial court erred by allowing into evidence pretrial statements which had been made by him but which had not been provided by the state in advance of the trial. The judgment is affirmed. Instructions by the defendant to witnesses of an accident not to speak to police did not qualify as discoverable material within the terms of Rule 16 of the Tennessee Rules of Criminal Procedure. In consequence, the defendant is not entitled to a new trial.

Jerry Hardcastle v. State of Tennessee
M1999-00598-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Jane W. Wheatcraft

State of Tennessee v. Aaron McFarland - Concurring
W1999-01410-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge Arthur T. Bennett

The majority finds the defendant's suppression issue non meritorious under Fifth Amendment analysis. While I do not disagree with the analysis, I believe the factual scenario presented requires review under Sixth Amendment analysis. At both the suppression hearing and at trial, the interviewing officer testified that the defendant "had been arrested the night before by uniformed officers and was in juvenile court." The defendant was interviewed the following morning around 11:00 a.m., after the officer "checked him out of juvenile court" and transported him to the police department's homicide division. I can only assume from these facts that, at the time of the police questioning, the defendant had been charged with the homicide of Terrell Deon Bullard. If this assumption is correct, then adversarial proceedings had been initiated and the defendant's Sixth Amendment, rather than his Fifth Amendment right to counsel, had attached.

State of Tennessee v. Aaron McFarland
W1999-01410-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge Arthur T. Bennett

The defendant was convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to life with the possibility of parole. On appeal, he has presented as issues that the trial court should have suppressed his confession and that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction. Based upon our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Kelly Anne Newmon
W1999-01497-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge Lee Moore

This appeal arises from a guilty verdict returned by a Carroll County jury against the defendant for two counts of delivering less than 0.5 grams of cocaine. On appeal, the defendant challenges her convictions on the basis that the introduction of evidence bolstering the informant's testimony was plain error, and the evidence was not sufficient to support the verdict. After a careful review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Patricia Merriweather
W1999-01711-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge Roy B. Morgan, Jr.

The defendant pled guilty in 1990 to thirty-two Class A misdemeanors, consisting of violations of the bad check law, and was placed on probation. During the probationary period, which was scheduled to end in 1994, the defendant was to pay restitution and costs. Shortly before the probationary period ended, the defendant signed an agreement, presented by her probation officer, extending indefinitely the probation so that restitution and costs could be paid. The trial court approved this extension. Probation violation reports were filed in 1997 and 1999, the court revoking the probation in 1999. The defendant timely appealed, arguing that the trial court was without authority to extend the probationary period without a hearing and to extend the period indefinitely. Based upon our review, we conclude that the defendant's probationary period ended in 1994, and we reverse the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee vs. David Lee and Treva Lee
M1999-02471-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge Leonard W. Martin

In this appeal, defendants challenge the sufficiency of the convicting evidence. The defendants were convicted by a Dickson County jury of criminal trespass and fined $50. Upon a review of the record, we find the evidence is sufficient to sustain the convictions. Thus, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

State of Tennessee v. Ricky Raymond Bryan
M1999-00854-CCA-R9-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge James K. Clayton, Jr.

The defendant, facing a third trial for first degree murder, has filed this interlocutory appeal. The defendant alleges that the trial court erred in disqualifying his counsel because of an appearance of impropriety. We affirm.

State of Tennessee vs. James A. Shively
M1999-01072-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge Henry Denmark Bell

Having pled guilty to various counts of aggravated burglary, robbery, auto theft, and theft, the defendant appeals from his sentences. He argues that the trial court improperly imposed consecutive sentences and that his effective twelve-year sentence is therefore excessive. After a de novo review, we affirm the sentences as imposed.

State of Tennessee v. Kenneth D. Melton
M1999-01248-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Judge Jane W. Wheatcraft

The appellant, Kenneth D. Melton, was convicted by a jury in the Sumner County Criminal Court of disorderly conduct, a class C misdemeanor. The trial court imposed a sentence of thirty days incarceration in the Sumner County Jail. The court then suspended all but five days of the appellant's sentence, placing the appellant on unsupervised probation for the remainder. On appeal, the appellant presents the following issues: (1) whether the indictment provided adequate notice to the appellant of the charged offense; and (2) whether the evidence adduced at trial supports his conviction of disorderly conduct. Following a review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Sherman Dunlap
M1999-00325-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Judge John W. Rollins

Sherman Dunlap appeals his sentence after pleading guilty in the Coffee County Circuit Court to facilitation of theft over $10,000, a class D felony. The trial court sentenced the appellant, as a Range II multiple offender, to four years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction, requiring the appellant to serve one year of his sentence in continuous confinement. On appeal, the appellant presents the following issue for review: whether the trial court erred in denying him full probation or, in the alternative, in denying him an opportunity to serve his sentence in periodic confinement. Following a review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Sherman Dunlap - Concurring
M1999-00325-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith
Trial Court Judge: John W. Rollins

While I concur fully in the judgment of the Court denying the appellant full probation, I do so because the record reflects the appellant has received probation for a number of previous offenses, but has yet to be rehabilitated. Thus, “measures less restrictive than confinement have frequently or recently been applied unsuccessfully to the [appellant].” See Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 40-35-103(c).  This reason alone amply justifies the denial of probation in this case.

Steve Barker v. State of Tennessee
W1999-00544-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge J. Steven Stafford

Petitioner appeals the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. Prior to entering a guilty plea in the instant case, the petitioner had been sentenced to twelve years for other state convictions and a consecutive 105 months on federal charges. Petitioner entered a plea of guilty to the current charges, which included six counts of theft over $1,000 and one count of burglary, Class D felonies, and nineteen counts of aggravated burglary, Class C felonies. Pursuant to a negotiated agreement, the petitioner received an effective sentence of eighteen years as a Range I, standard offender. The agreement provided that this sentence would be served concurrently with both his prior state and federal sentences. The petitioner now claims that, but for counsel's ineffective assistance, he would not have pled guilty. Following a review of the record, we find trial counsel was not ineffective and affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. David Alan Hurst
W1999-01860-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge John Franklin Murchison

The defendant appeals his convictions for two counts of aggravated assault and two counts of simple assault and the consecutive five-year sentences imposed for the aggravated assaults. The defendant raises the following issues in this appeal: 1) whether evidence presented at trial was sufficient to sustain the guilty verdicts, and 2) whether the trial court erred by imposing consecutive sentences for the two aggravated assault convictions. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Henry Lee Berry
E1999-00704-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge Richard R. Baumgartner

Henry Lee Berry appeals his Knox County conviction for second degree murder. Berry contends that (1) the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction; (2) the trial court erroneously admitted into evidence two recorded 911 telephone calls and an order of protection entered against the appellant by the victim; and (3) the trial court erred by failing to grant a mistrial when evidence of a pending rape charge in Nashville was introduced before the jury. Additionally, the appellant urges adoption of DNA testing on decomposed bodies to positively establish the identity of the victim. Although we conclude that admission of the 911 telephone calls and the order of protection was error, the error was harmless. Moreover, finding no other reversible error of law, we affirm the judgment of conviction entered by the trial court.

State of Tennessee vs. James T. Cooper
M1999-01132-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge Stella L. Hargrove

The defendant appeals the trial court's revocation of his probation, based on his failing a drug screen and his delinquency in paying court costs. We hold that the record is insufficient to support the trial court's finding of delinquent payments. However, the failing of the drug screen served as a sufficient basis for the revocation. We affirm the trial court's order. .

Donna Jean Sexton v. State of Tennessee
E1999-02226-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Lynn W. Brown

State vs. Lester Douglas Giles
E1999-02236-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Carroll L. Ross
On June 21, 1999, the defendant pled guilty in the Monroe County Criminal Court to attempted rape and was sentenced to four years as a Range I standard offender. The sentence was suspended, and he was placed on probation. On July 6, 1999, a probation violation was issued, alleging that the defendant had violated his probation by having contact with the victim's family. Following a hearing on August 16, 1999, the trial court ruled that the defendant had violated the terms of his probation, a ruling which the defendant timely appealed. Based upon our review, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and reinstate the defendant's probation.

State vs. Carl Couch
W1999-00645-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: C. Creed Mcginley
The defendant appeals his split sentence of 60 days confinement plus 1 year and 4 months of probation for the offense of reckless endangerment with a deadly weapon. The defendant contends in this appeal that the trial court erred in denying him total probation. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Robin Vanhoose
W1999-00708-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: C. Creed Mcginley
The defendant was convicted by a Hardin County jury of aggravated assault and received an eight-year sentence as a Range II multiple offender. He now appeals his conviction alleging (1) the indictment does not state an offense; and (2) the evidence is insufficient to support aggravated assault. We conclude the indictment adequately informed the defendant of the offense charged, and the evidence presented at trial was sufficient for the jury to conclude he was guilty of aggravated assault. Thus, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.