State vs. Dereke Fitzgerald W2000-01279-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Julian P. Guinn
The appellant, Dereke Emont Fitzgerald, was convicted by a jury of aggravated assault and was sentenced to six years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the appellant raises one issue: Whether the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the issue of self-defense. Finding no error, we affirm the judgment.
Henry
Court of Criminal Appeals
State vs. Johnny Jones W2000-01241-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Jon Kerry Blackwood
This appeal follows dismissal of the Appellant's petition for post-conviction relief. The Appellant, Jones, was convicted by a Fayette County jury of possession of cocaine (over 26 grams) with intent to sell and possession of marijuana. On direct appeal, his convictions and sentences were affirmed. The Appellant filed this post-conviction petition asserting the following errors: (1) the trial court erred in not granting the Appellant's motion to sever; (2) the trial court erred in sentencing the Appellant; and (3) deficient representation by defense counsel including failing to timely file a Rule 11 application to the supreme court from this court's decision. We find that Appellant's defense counsel was ineffective with respect to his failure to timely file a Rule 11 application. Accordingly, the Appellant is granted the right to seek a delayed appeal to the Tennessee Supreme Court. Denial of post-conviction relief is affirmed as to the remaining issues.
Fayette
Court of Criminal Appeals
State vs. Michael Upshaw W1999-00777-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Gary R Wade
Trial Court Judge: James C. Beasley, Jr.
Shelby
Court of Criminal Appeals
State vs. Jerry Elliott W1999-00361-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: John Franklin Murchison
The Defendant, Jerry Wayne Elliott, pled guilty to three counts of aggravated assault, reserving his right to appeal a certified question of law, pursuant to Tenn. R. Crim. P. 37(b)(2)(i). Defendant had filed a Motion to Suppress evidence obtained from an allegedly unconstitutional search and seizure of Defendant, which the trial court denied following an evidentiary hearing. The denial of this Motion to Suppress is the basis of the certified question of law. After review of the record and the briefs we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Henderson
Court of Criminal Appeals
State vs. Shannon Corley E2000-00382-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.
The defendant seeks full probation after pleading guilty to aggravated burglary and theft. She claims the trial court erred in requiring her to be incarcerated for ninety days of her four-year sentence. We affirm the sentence as imposed.
Blount
Court of Criminal Appeals
William Collins vs. State E1999-02759-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Gary R Wade
Trial Court Judge: Lynn W. Brown
Because the trial court properly treated a habeas corpus petition as one for post-conviction relief and because the statute of limitations barred any review of constitutional issues, the petition was properly dismissed.
Washington
Court of Criminal Appeals
State vs. Myra L. Smith E1999-02196-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Mary Beth Leibowitz
Myra L. Smith appeals the sentencing decision of the Knox County Criminal Court revoking her non-incarcerative sentence and ordering service of the sentence in the TDOC. In September 1998, Smith pled guilty to the class C felony of facilitating aggravated robbery and was placed under the supervision of the Knox County Community Alternative to Prison Program (CAPP). Four months later, a violation warrant issued. On appeal, Smith argues that the trial court acted arbitrarily in revoking her suspended sentence by failing to consider her extreme drug addiction, her history of mental illness, and her lack of intent to violate the conditions of probation. Finding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion, we affirm.
Knox
Court of Criminal Appeals
State vs. Joe C. Anderson a/k/a Uncle Tom E1999-02485-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: E. Eugene Eblen
Raising issues of sufficiency of the evidence and improper sentencing, Joe C. Anderson appeals from his conviction of second degree murder in the Loudon County Criminal Court. Because we discern no error requiring reversal, we affirm.
Loudon
Court of Criminal Appeals
State vs. Sandra Cooper W2002-01036-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Roy B. Morgan, Jr.
Defendant, Sandra Hoyle Cooper, appeals the trial court's revocation of her community corrections sentence. Defendant received two community corrections sentences of eleven months and twenty-nine days each following two separate convictions for theft and for filing a false police report. While serving her community corrections sentences, Defendant was arrested for aggravated robbery. Following a revocation hearing, the trial court revoked her community corrections sentences and ordered the imposition of her original sentences. Defendant argues that the trial court improperly based its revocation on circumstantial evidence that she committed the offense for which she was arrested. After a careful review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Madison
Court of Criminal Appeals
State vs. Emit Keith Cody E2000-02188-CCA-RM-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Ben W. Hooper, II
The Defendant, Emit Keith Cody, was convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. He appealed, and we reversed his conviction and remanded the case for a new trial based on our conclusion that the trial court's failure to give a limiting instruction to the jury on the use of the State's main witness's prior inconsistent statement constituted plain error. See State v. Emit Keith Cody, No. E1999-00068-CCA-R3CD, 2000 WL 190227 (Tenn. Crim. App., Knoxville, Feb. 16, 2000). The State applied for permission to appeal to the supreme court, which granted permission for the purpose of remanding the case to this Court for reconsideration in light of the supreme court's recent decision in State v. Smith, 24 S.W.3d 274 (Tenn. 2000). After revisiting this issue, we remain of the opinion that the trial court committed plain error by failing to give a limiting instruction. Accordingly, the Defendant's conviction is reversed, and the case is remanded for a new trial.
Cocke
Court of Criminal Appeals
Eddie Copeland vs. James A. Bowlen, Warden E1999-01753-CCA-R3-CD
Trial Court Judge: Buddy D. Perry
The trial court dismissed the petitioner's pro se petition for habeas corpus relief. The petitioner alleges that various credits should reduce his sentence. The trial court determined that it lacked jurisdiction to address this issue or, in the alternative, that the sentence had not expired. We affirm the dismissal of the petition.
Bledsoe
Court of Criminal Appeals
State vs. Rosalind Marie Johnson & Donna Yvette McCoy E1999-02468-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Defendant, Rosalind Marie Johnson, appeals her convictions for facilitation of first degree felony murder and aggravated burglary, for which she received concurrent sentences of 15 years and 3 years, respectively. Defendant, Donna Yvette McCoy, appeals her convictions for first degree felony murder and aggravated burglary, for which she received concurrent sentences of life with the possibility of parole and 3 years, respectively. Both defendants raise the issue of sufficiency of the evidence to support their convictions. Defendant Johnson raises the following additional issues in her appeal: 1) whether the trial court erred in failing to sever the defendants' trials; 2) whether the trial court erred in failing to remove a juror for cause; and 3) whether the trial court erred in failing to suppress statements made by Johnson. We conclude that the issues raised by both defendants in this appeal are without merit. The judgments of the trial court are affirmed.
The Defendant, Shawn Dontay Beard, appeals as of right following his conviction in the Warren County Circuit Court. Defendant was convicted by a jury for sale of a Schedule II controlled substance, cocaine, in an amount of less than point five (0.5) grams within one thousand feet of school grounds. Defendant argues there was insufficient evidence regarding his identity to support his conviction. He further challenges the length of his sentence on the grounds that the State raised the felony classification of his offense pursuant to the Drug-Free School Zone Act but failed to provide the Defendant with notice of enhancement. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
The appellant, Stejana S. Holder, was convicted of one count of aggravated assault, one count of resisting arrest, and one count of disorderly conduct. The Davidson County Criminal Court imposed an effective sentence of three years to serve sixty days in the workhouse followed by two years probation. On appeal, the appellant alleges that the trial court erred by denying total probation. Upon review, we find no error and affirm the sentence of the Davidson County Criminal Court.
Defendant was convicted by a jury of four counts of aggravated sexual battery and ten counts of rape of a child. In this direct appeal Defendant alleges he did not receive a fair trial because (1) the bill of particulars did not sufficiently inform Defendant of the charges, and (2) the prosecution violated Brady vs. Maryland when it failed to turn-over potentially exculpatory evidence to Defendant pre-trial. Held: the bill of particulars adequately appraised Defendant of the crimes with which he was charged. Although the prosecution violated Brady when it failed to turn over potentially exculpatory evidence to Defendant pre-trial, the error was harmless. Judgment of the trial court affirmed.
State vs. Delwin Keith O'Neal M2000-00650-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: W. Charles Lee
In 1997, the defendant pled guilty in Marshall County to aggravated assault. Pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, he was sentenced as a Range II, multiple offender and received a six-year sentence, consecutive to a prior Montgomery County sentence. The defendant now claims his sentence does not comport with the plea agreement and asks this court to modify the sentence. Upon our review of the record, we conclude the defendant did not timely challenge his sentence and deny relief.
Marshall
Court of Criminal Appeals
Gerome Smith vs. State M1999-02511-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Gary R Wade
Trial Court Judge: Jane W. Wheatcraft
The petitioner, Gerome Smith, appeals the trial court's disposition of his petition for post-conviction relief. While granting the petitioner 60 days within which to file an application for permission to appeal to our supreme court this court's affirmance of the original conviction and sentence, the trial court otherwise denied post-conviction relief. The single issue presented for review is whether the petitioner was denied the effective assistance of counsel at trial and on appeal. Because the petitioner has been unable to meet his burden of proof, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Sumner
Court of Criminal Appeals
State vs. Theron L. Boyd M1999-01125-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Seth W. Norman
The Defendant, Theron L. Boyd, appeals as of right from an "Agreed Final Judgment Granting Delayed Appeal" entered by the trial court upon the trial court's finding that the Defendant was entitled to post-conviction relief. The "Agreed Final Judgment Granting Delayed Appeal" purports to modify the original judgment of conviction by explicitly reserving certified questions of law which would be dispositive of the case and then to grant a delayed appeal of those issues. The Defendant argues that his convictions pursuant to his guilty pleas should be reversed because the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress evidence found as a result of illegal searches by police. The State, however, argues that we lack jurisdiction to address the merits of the Defendant's contentions because the trial court did not have jurisdiction to amend the final judgment which did not reflect the reservation of certified questions of law pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 37(b). We conclude that this appeal is not properly before us. Accordingly, we must dismiss this appeal and remand to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Davidson
Court of Criminal Appeals
State vs. Tywan Faulk M1999-01124-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Robert W. Wedemeyer
The appellant, Tywan Faulk, appeals his conviction by a jury in the Montgomery County Circuit Court of one count of possession of more than .5 grams of cocaine with intent to deliver and within 1,000 feet of a school, a class A felony. Prior to trial, the appellant pled guilty to driving on a revoked license, a class B misdemeanor. Pursuant to the appellant's conviction for possession of cocaine with intent to deliver, the trial court imposed a sentence of fifteen years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. Additionally, the trial court imposed a sentence of thirty days incarceration in the county jail for the driving on a revoked license conviction. The trial court further ordered that the appellant's sentences be served concurrently. On appeal, the appellant presents the following issues for review: (1) whether the trial court erred in denying the appellant's motion to suppress evidence seized as a result of an unlawful detention; (2) whether the trial court erred in denying the appellant's motion for judgment of acquittal with regard to possession with intent to sell or deliver at the close of the State's case in chief as the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction; (3) whether the trial court erred by allowing the arresting officer to testify that the passenger in the appellant's car had a certain amount of cash in his possession; (4) whether the trial court erred by giving supplemental instructions to the jury without first putting the instructions in writing; (5) whether the trial court erred by repeatedly referring to the prosecutor as "General" in the presence of the jury throughout the proceeding; and, (6) whether the prejudicial effect of these errors cumulatively requires reversal of the appellant's conviction. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
State vs. Joe Hurt W2001-02742-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: C. Creed Mcginley
The defendant contends the trial court should have sentenced him to a Community Corrections Program. We conclude ample evidence exists to support the trial court's findings that incarceration is necessary to protect society from the defendant. The defendant has a long history of criminal conduct. We affirm the judgments from the trial court.
