COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OPINIONS

State vs. Eddie Lowe
W1999-00881-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Chris B. Craft
The petitioner, Eddie Lee Lowe, appeals the trial court's denial of his petition for post-conviction relief from his second degree murder and especially aggravated robbery convictions pursuant to guilty pleas. The petitioner contends that he received the ineffective assistance of counsel because neither his juvenile court attorney nor his trial attorneys preserved his right to appeal his transfer from juvenile court to criminal court for trial as an adult. Because the petitioner had no right to an acceptance hearing in the trial court, we hold that his juvenile court attorney was not deficient for failing to move for such a hearing. Also, we hold that the petitioner has failed to show deficient performance or prejudice by the fact that his trial attorney did not seek to reserve a certified question of law on the transfer issue. We affirm the trial court's denial of the petition.

State vs. Terrance Pulliam
W1999-00277-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Carolyn Wade Blackett
The Defendant, Terrence Pulliam, appeals as of right from the trial court's denial of post-conviction relief. He asserts that the trial court erred by finding that he received effective assistance of counsel at trial. The Defendant argues generally that counsel was ineffective due to failure to thoroughly investigate his case and to call relevant witnesses, failure to properly advise him throughout the process, and failure to properly impeach State witnesses. We conclude that the evidence does not preponderate against the trial court's finding that the Defendant received effective assistance of counsel at trial. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Anthony Carlton
W1999-00407-CCA-R3-PC
Trial Court Judge: Carolyn Wade Blackett
The defendant, Anthony Carlton, was convicted by a Shelby County jury of attempted first-degree murder. Following this court's affirmance of that conviction, the defendant sought post-conviction relief in the Shelby County Criminal Court, and that court denied relief. On appeal, this court finds (1) the defendant did not prove that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to advise him of his right not to testify, and (2) we are precluded from considering the adequacy of the defendant's appellate representation when that issue was not raised in the court below.

State vs. Ryan Little
W1999-01033-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Chris B. Craft
Ryan J. Little was convicted of one count aggravated robbery, one count aggravated burglary, and three counts of attempted aggravated robbery. An effective twenty-four year sentence was imposed. In this appeal as of right, the appellant contests the trial court's imposition of partial consecutive sentences. The proof before this court supports the trial court's finding that the appellant is a "dangerous offender." Accordingly, we affirm the sentencing decision of the trial court.

Willie James Robinson, Jr. vs. State
E1999-00945-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: E. Eugene Eblen
The defendant seeks habeas corpus relief from two life sentences, claiming that the sentences are void because the trial judge failed to sign the judgments or the minutes. We hold that the failure to sign the judgments and the minutes does not render the petitioner's sentences void. The trial court is affirmed.

State vs. Michael Lynn Breeden
E1999-01290-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.
The defendant, Michael Lynn Breeden, appeals the revocation of his probation. He contends that his remaining on probation would provide more supervision than he will have on parole and would allow him to be more timely in paying restitution. We hold that the defendant's record of noncompliance with the terms of probation is substantial evidence to support the trial court's decision to revoke probation. We affirm the trial court.

State vs. Mark Anthony Griffin
E1999-00122-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Richard R. Baumgartner
The defendant appeals his convictions for aggravated robbery and attempted robbery, for which he received an effective nine-year sentence. The defendant raises the following issues in this appeal: 1) whether evidence presented at trial was sufficient to sustain the guilty verdicts; 2) whether the trial court erred by not suppressing his confession; and 3) whether the trial court erred by denying the defendant's motion for dismissal based upon a violation of due process and denial of a speedy trial. We conclude the first two issues are without merit, but remand for another hearing on the due process/speedy trial issue.

State vs. Tony Jamerson
W1999-00935-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Joseph B. Dailey
The appellant, Tony Jamerson, appeals from his conviction of first degree premeditated murder, for which he is serving a sentence of life without the possibility of parole. He alleges his conviction was based upon insufficient evidence of premeditation, that his confession was obtained in violation of his constitutional rights and improperly admitted as evidence against him, and that he was denied his right to confront a witness against him by the trial court's ruling limiting the scope of cross-examination of a witness. Finding no merit in these contentions, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Dak Manyal
W1999-00909-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: W. Fred Axley
Pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, the Defendant was convicted of attempted aggravated sexual battery and was sentenced to serve four years in the Shelby County Correction Center. He appeals from the trial court's denial of his request to serve the balance of his sentence on probation. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. James Robert Ledford
E1999-00917-CCA-R3-CD
A Bradley County jury found the appellant, James Robert Ledford, guilty of one count of conspiring to present a false insurance claim, presenting a false insurance claim, and arson of personal property. For these offenses, the appellant was sentenced to five years, with all but ninety days suspended. In this appeal as of right, the appellant contends that (1) the trial court erred in denying suppression of his statement to the police which was obtained in violation of his constitutional rights and (2) the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction for conspiracy to present a false insurance claim. After review, we affirm.

William Bret Robinson vs. State
E1999-00950-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: James B. Scott, Jr.
The state appeals the trial court's exoneration of a bond forfeiture taken against AA Bonding Company. The trial court exonerated the bonding company of the entire bond amount of $8,000, even though the forfeiture was final and the full amount had been paid to the trial court clerk. Concluding that Tenn. Code Annotated section 40-11-204(a) authorizes the action of the trial court and that the record reflects no abuse of the trial court's discretion, even though the trial court granted the exoneration via an $8,000 credit against AA Bonding's future forfeitures in Anderson County, we affirm the trial court's order to grant exoneration; however, we reverse as to the amount of, and the manner of effectuating the refund.

State of Tennessee v. Keith Pettigrew
W2002-02539-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Joseph B. Dailey

State vs. Orlando Ward
W1999-00609-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Cornelia A. Clark
Trial Court Judge: W. Fred Axley
Undercover police officers arrested defendant and recovered 2.7 grams of cocaine from his vehicle. Defendant was indicted for possession of cocaine with intent to sell or deliver, a Class C felony. He entered a plea of guilty to the lesser offense of attempt to commit possession of cocaine with intent to sell or deliver, a Class D felony. As a part of the negotiated plea agreement defendant agreed to a sentence of two (2) years as a standard offender. The manner of service was left for determination by the trial court. Defendant now appeals the trial court's finding that he should serve his sentence without the opportunity for alternative sentencing. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Arthur Clark
W1999-01747-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Chris B. Craft
The defendant was found guilty by a Shelby County jury on two counts of rape. The second count of the indictment, charging rape of a "physically helpless" victim, was merged by the trial court with the first count, charging forcible rape; and the defendant was sentenced to eight years and three months. In this appeal as of right, he argues the trial court should have forced the State to elect one count of the indictment upon which to proceed. He further challenges the sufficiency of the evidence as to both counts of the indictment. We conclude the State was not required to make an election. We further conclude that the evidence is sufficient to support the defendant's conviction for forcible rape, but not rape of a "physically helpless" victim. Thus, we remand to the trial court for entry of a new judgment in accordance with this opinion.

Arzolia Charles Goines vs. State
E1999-02459-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Ray L. Jenkins
The appellant, Arzolia Charles Goines, appeals the dismissal of his writ of error coram nobis by the Knox County Criminal Court on September 1, 1999. Following a review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Danny S. Cosby vs State
M1999-01861-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Steve R. Dozier
The Appellant, Danny S. Cosby, pleaded guilty to two counts of attempted first degree murder and to two counts of aggravated assault. Pursuant to a plea agreement, the Davidson County Criminal Court sentenced the Appellant to an effective sentence of thirty years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The Appellant subsequently filed for post-conviction relief, claiming that his plea was constitutionally defective because he was inadequately represented. The trial court denied relief. After review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Willie Smith
W2001-02973-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Joseph H. Walker, III
The defendant, Willie Nathaniel Smith, appeals as of right his conviction by a jury in the Tipton County Circuit Court of delivery of .5 grams or more of cocaine, a Class B felony, and his resulting fifteen-year sentence. He also appeals the concurrent fifteen-year sentences received following his guilty pleas to two additional counts of delivery of .5 grams or more of cocaine. He contends (1) the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction in case number 4149; (2) the trial court erroneously allowed a police investigator to testify about what he heard on a recording device; and (3) his sentences in both cases are excessive. We affirm the judgments of conviction.

State vs. Jeremy Jones
E1999-02207-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: James Edward Beckner
The defendant appeals his conviction and sentence for theft of property, asserting that insufficient evidence supported the verdict and that the trial court erroneously sentenced him to three years of incarceration. We affirm the conviction and modify the sentence to two years of incarceration.

State vs. Eric William Sanders
E1999-00345-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: R. Jerry Beck
The Defendant pleaded guilty in Sullivan County Criminal Court to violation of a habitual traffic offender order, a Class E felony, and driving under the influence, second offense, a Class A misdemeanor. The Defendant was sentenced to serve one year in the Tennessee Department of Correction as a Range I standard offender for violation of the HTO order and eleven months and twenty-nine days, suspended except for forty-five days, for the DUI. The sentences were to run consecutively. After serving thirty percent of his one-year sentence for violation of the HTO order, the Defendant was released by determinate release to the local jail to serve the remainder of his mandatory forty-five day jail term for the DUI conviction, and he was then released on probation pursuant to determinate release. Within one year of the convictions, two warrants were filed alleging that the Defendant violated the terms of his determinate release for the HTO conviction, but neither warrant made reference to the DUI conviction. Following a hearing, at which the Defendant stipulated that he had absconded as alleged in the second warrant, the trial court revoked the Defendant's probation for the HTO conviction and ordered the Defendant to serve his sentence. The trial court continued disposition of the first warrant to allow the State to file a written motion to amend the first warrant to include the DUI conviction. The trial court then issued a third warrant to amend the first warrant to include the DUI conviction. Following a hearing on the first warrant, as amended, the trial court revoked the Defendant's probation for the DUI conviction and ordered him to serve that sentence as well. The Defendant now appeals, arguing (1) that the trial court did not have jurisdiction to revoke his probation for the DUI conviction, and (2) that the trial court abused its discretion in revoking his probation for the DUI conviction. Finding no error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Jimmy Wayne Baker
M1999-00454-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: W. Charles Lee
The Defendant, Jimmy Wayne Baker, was convicted by a Bedford County jury of first degree felony murder during the perpetration of or the attempt to perpetrate theft of property, first degree premeditated murder, and aggravated arson. The trial court merged the felony murder conviction with the premeditated murder conviction. The Defendant was sentenced as a Range I standard offender to life imprisonment for the first degree murder conviction and to twenty-one years and nine months incarceration for the aggravated arson conviction, to be served concurrently. The Defendant now appeals, arguing the following: (1) that the trial court erred in instructing the jury to determine whether one of the witnesses was an accomplice; (2) that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to convict the Defendant of premeditated murder, felony murder, or aggravated arson; (3) that the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury that they must agree unanimously on a particular set of facts to support a finding of first degree felony murder; (4) that his convictions of both premeditated murder and felony murder violated the Double Jeopardy Clause and the Supremacy Clause; (5) that the Defendant was not properly informed of the elements of and facts necessary to constitute the offense of theft of property as the underlying felony in the felony murder conviction; (6) that the Defendant's sentence for aggravated arson was excessive; and (7) that the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury on all elements of the offenses charged. After review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Donald Ree Jones
M2000-00381-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: J. O. Bond
The defendant, Donald Ree Jones, challenges the trial court's dismissal of his motion to correct an illegal sentence. He argues that his sentence is illegal because his agreed sentence pursuant to a guilty plea following the remand of his case was higher than his initial sentence, which was overturned on appeal. We hold that a defendant may not bring an appeal as of right from the dismissal of a motion to correct an illegal sentence and that an illegal sentence is properly challenged in a petition for habeas corpus relief. Treating this appeal as a petition for a writ of certiorari, we hold that the defendant's sentence is legal and decline to grant the petition.

State vs. Michael G. Waldrum
M1999-01924-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Timothy L. Easter
The defendant appeals his conviction for DUI, fourth offense, contesting the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction; the validity of his seizure and arrest; and the admissibility of the breath alcohol test result, the breath alcohol test operator's videotaped former testimony, and the breath alcohol test machine's certification documents. We conclude that the trial court erred in finding the breath test operator unavailable and that his videotaped testimony should not have been allowed. We reverse the judgment of conviction and remand the case for a new trial.

W1999-1453-CCA-R3-PC
W1999-1453-CCA-R3-PC
Trial Court Judge: John P. Colton, Jr.

Jerrell Livingston vs. James Dukes
W2000-00840-CCA-R3-CD
Trial Court Judge: Joseph H. Walker, III
This appeal results from the trial court's denial of the petitioner's petition for writ of habeas corpus based on the fact that the challenged judgment was not invalid on its face, nor had the petitioner's sentence expired. The court also considered this request as a petition for post-conviction relief but dismissed the petition for lack of jurisdiction. Based upon our review of the record, we affirm the trial court's dismissal of the petitioner's request for habeas corpus or post-conviction relief.

Jimmy Greene vs. State
E2000-00426-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.
A Blount County jury convicted the Petitioner of the aggravated rape of a person less than thirteen years of age, and the trial court sentenced him to twenty-two years incarceration. His conviction was affirmed on direct appeal. The Petitioner petitioned for post-conviction relief, and the trial court denied his request. He now appeals the trial court's denial of post-conviction relief, arguing that he received ineffective assistance of counsel at trial and on appeal. We conclude that the Petitioner was not denied the effective assistance of counsel and accordingly affirm the judgment of the court below.