Osayamien Ogbeiwi v. State of Tennessee
Petitioner, Osayamien Ogbeiwi, was convicted of first degree premeditated murder and was sentenced to life imprisonment. This court upheld Petitioner’s conviction on direct appeal. Petitioner subsequently filed a petition for post-conviction relief, alleging that he received ineffective assistance of counsel at trial and on appeal. Following a hearing, the post-conviction court denied the petition. On appeal, Petitioner maintains that his counsel was ineffective in (1) failing to challenge an expanded jury instruction on premeditation at trial and on appeal; (2) advising him to testify regarding self-defense and in failing to request a jury instruction on self-defense and in failing to challenge the lack of an instruction on appeal; and (3) failing to adequately challenge the admission of DNA evidence at trial and on appeal. Petitioner also maintains that he was denied due process due to the State’s failure to provide his capias in discovery during the post-conviction proceedings. Upon review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Jeremy James Dalton
Defendant was convicted of attempted first degree murder and sentenced to forty years in incarceration after stabbing his neighbor, the victim, several times. Defendant represented himself at trial and now represents himself on appeal. He raises a variety of issues including: (1) whether the evidence was sufficient; (2) whether the trial court erred in admitting the preliminary hearing testimony of the victim; (3) whether the trial court erred in denying the motion to suppress; (4) whether the trial court should have granted a continuance; (5) whether the trial court erred in excluding a statement; (6) whether the trial court improperly allowed a witness to use a “script”; (7) whether the State violated Brady, Napue, or Giglio; (8) whether the State improperly used Defendant’s prior convictions for impeachment; (9) whether Defendant was denied access to court; (10) whether the trial court properly limited Defendant’s use of an intake video; (11) whether the trial court properly instructed the jury; (12) whether the State committed prosecutorial misconduct; (13) whether Defendant was denied compulsory process; (14) whether the trial court should have recused itself; (15) whether the appellate record was transmitted in error; (16) whether the sentence is excessive; and (17) whether cumulative error requires reversal of the conviction. Finding no error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Fentress | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Nancy Abbie Tallent
The pro se Defendant, Nancy Abbie Tallent, was convicted by an Anderson County |
Anderson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Jimmy Richard Burrow II
The Defendant, Jimmy Richard Burrow II, pleaded guilty to aggravated burglary, a Class C felony; possession of methamphetamine, a Class A misdemeanor; possession with intent to sell or deliver a Schedule V controlled substance, a Class E felony; and possession of a firearm after a felony drug conviction, a Class C felony. See T.C.A. §§ 39-13-1003 (Supp. 2020) (subsequently amended) (aggravated burglary), 39-17-434(a)(4) (2018) (possession of methamphetamine), 39-17-417(a)(4) (Supp. 2020) (subsequently amended) (possession of a Schedule V controlled substance), 39-17-1307(c)(1) (2018) (subsequently amended) (possession of a firearm). He received an effective ten-year sentence to be served in confinement but was subsequently released to a residential drug recovery program. The Defendant violated the terms and conditions of the recovery program, and, after a hearing, the trial court ordered the Defendant to serve his sentence. On appeal, the Defendant contends that the trial court erred by failing to consider alternative sentencing and the Defendant’s amenability to future rehabilitation. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Wilson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Laverick Clark
A Shelby County jury convicted the Defendant, Laverick Clark, of one count of attempted first degree murder with serious bodily injury, one count of attempted first degree murder, two counts of especially aggravated burglary, one count of aggravated assault, and one count of stalking. The trial court sentenced the Defendant to a total effective sentence of twenty-five years. On appeal, the Defendant contends that the trial court erred when it denied his motion for a mistrial and when it sentenced him. He also contends the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction for attempted first degree murder. Following our review, we affirm the trial court’s judgments. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Charles Lynell Sims
The Defendant, Charles Lynell Sims, pled guilty in the Knox County Criminal Court to aggravated assault, a Class C felony, in exchange for a Range II sentence of eight years, with the manner of service left to the trial court’s determination. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court ordered the Defendant to serve the entire eight-year sentence in confinement. On appeal, the Defendant argues that the trial court abused its discretion in ordering a sentence of total confinement. Based on our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Court of Criminal Appeals | ||
State of Tennessee v. Bryan Anthony Capps
A Knox County jury convicted the Defendant, Bryan Anthony Capps, of two counts of sexual battery, two counts of sexual battery by an authority figure, and one count of violating the Sexual Offender Registry. The trial court sentenced the Defendant to an effective eight-year sentence to be served in the Tennessee Department of Correction. In his appeal, the Defendant argues that (1) the evidence was insufficient to show that the Defendant qualified as an authority figure or that he conducted an overnight visit at a residence with minors present; (2) the trial court’s oath as administered to the minor witnesses, which included a “pinky promise,” amounted to an improper comment on their credibility; (3) the trial court erred by allowing the prosecution to question a defense witness about felony convictions more than ten years old; and (4) the trial court erred by denying split confinement and by imposing consecutive sentences. Upon our review, we respectfully affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Sergio Rangel
The Defendant, Sergio Rangel, was convicted by a Knox County Criminal Court jury of facilitation of aggravated burglary, a Class D felony, and sentenced by the trial court as a Range I, standard offender to four years, suspended to three years of supervised probation following twelve months of confinement. The sole issue the Defendant raises on appeal is whether the evidence is sufficient to sustain his conviction. Based on our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court but remand for entry of a corrected judgment to reflect the correct conviction offense. |
Court of Criminal Appeals | ||
State of Tennessee v. Charles Ivie Porter
After the denial of a motion to suppress, Charles Ivie Porter, Defendant, pled guilty to two counts of possession of methamphetamine with the intent to sell in exchange for the dismissal of seven additional drug charges in two separate cases. He received an effective sentence of twelve years in incarceration. Pursuant to the plea agreement, the parties reserved a certified question of law for appeal under Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 37(b)(2). After a review, we determine that we do not have jurisdiction to address the certified question because it does not meet the requirements of Rule 37(b)(2) and State v. Preston, 759 S.W.2d 647 (Tenn. 1988). Therefore, we dismiss the appeal. |
Macon | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Artevious Moore, Jr.
The Defendant, Artevious Moore, Jr., pled guilty to theft of property and was placed on judicial diversion. Thereafter, the Defendant pled guilty to aggravated assault, leaving sentencing to the trial court. He also agreed to have the trial court rescind his judicial diversion, enter an adjudication of guilt as to the theft charge, and allow the court to impose the sentence. After a consolidated sentencing hearing, the court denied alternative sentencing and sentenced the Defendant to three years for the aggravated assault conviction and two years for the theft conviction. The trial court ordered the sentences to be aligned consecutively for an effective sentence of five years to be served in confinement. The Defendant appealed, challenging the consecutive sentences and the denial of alternative sentencing. Upon our review, we respectfully affirm the trial court’s judgments. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Travis Andrew Harris
Defendant, Travis Andrew Harris, was convicted of first degree premeditated murder and |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Stacy Michelle Cochran
Stacy Michelle Cochran, Defendant, entered an open plea of guilty to three felonies and one misdemeanor. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced her as a Range II multiple offender to an effective sentence of twenty-four years to be served at 35%, plus eleven months and 29 days to be served at 75%. Defendant claims that the State entered into a plea agreement for her to be sentenced as a Range I offender and that the trial court erred in sentencing her as a Range II offender. Because the record on appeal, which does not contain the transcript of the plea submission hearing or the transcript of the sentencing hearing, is inadequate for meaningful appellate review, we are precluded from addressing the issue. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. |
Carroll | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Eugenio Gomez Ruiz
A Knox County jury convicted the Defendant, Eugenio Gomez Ruiz, of furnishing alcohol to a person under twenty-one years of age, a Class A misdemeanor. The trial court sentenced the Defendant to eleven months and twenty-nine days, ordering that the sentence be suspended after service of six months in confinement. On appeal, the Defendant argues that the trial court erred (1) in finding that the crime is a strict liability crime and thereby erred in denying his requests for a jury instruction on mental states and to introduce evidence relevant to certain defenses; and (2) in sentencing him to serve six months in confinement. He also asserts that the State committed prosecutorial misconduct by charging him with a strict liability offense instead of one requiring a culpable mental state. Upon our review, we respectfully affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Jamie Scott Brock v. State of Tennessee
A Claiborne County jury convicted the Petitioner, Jamie Scott Brock, of first degree murder in 2006, and the trial court sentenced him to life imprisonment. More than thirteen years after his conviction was affirmed on appeal, the Petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief in 2024. The post-conviction court summarily dismissed the petition after finding it to be untimely and concluding that principles of due process did not toll the running of the statute of limitations. The Petitioner appealed. Upon our review, we respectfully affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Claiborne | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Ronald Anson Wheeler v. Vincent Vantell, Warden
In 2022, the Petitioner entered a best interest plea to one count of reckless homicide and two counts of selling fentanyl. By agreement, the State dismissed multiple other pending charges, and the trial court entered the agreed sentence of fifteen years. In 2024, the Petitioner filed a petition for habeas corpus relief contending that, pursuant to the circumstances of the plea, the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the case, nullifying his convictions. The habeas corpus court summarily dismissed the petition. The Petitioner filed an untimely appeal but claims that he improperly filed for appeal in the wrong court. On appeal, he maintains his subject matter jurisdiction claim. After review, we affirm the habeas corpus court’s judgment. |
Trousdale | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Joseph Sakai Hall
Pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, Defendant, Joseph Sakai Hall, pleaded guilty in the Davidson County Criminal Court to one count of aggravated assault involving serious bodily injury, a Class C felony, and received a sentence of three to four years as a Range I offender with the trial court to determine the length and manner of service and whether to grant Defendant’s request for judicial diversion. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court denied Defendant’s request for diversion and sentenced him to four years with 180 days to serve and the remainder to be supervised on probation. After a careful review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Raymond Mefford
The Defendant, Raymond Mefford, was convicted of two counts of aggravated assault following a bench trial in the Robertson County Circuit Court. He was sentenced to serve four years in confinement. On appeal, the Defendant challenges the trial court’s denial of alternative sentencing, arguing that the trial court should have offered the elderly and homeless Defendant rehabilitative treatment in the form of housing assistance or work programs. Following our review, we affirm. |
Robertson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
William G. Creasy v. Vincent Vantell
The Petitioner, William G. Creasy, appeals the Trousdale County Circuit Court’s summary dismissal of his petition for writ of habeas corpus relief. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the habeas corpus court pursuant to Rule 20 of the Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals. |
Trousdale | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Doyle Wayne Mason, Jr. v. State of Tennessee
Petitioner, Doyle Wayne Mason, Jr., appeals the denial of his post-conviction petition, |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Bobby V. Summers
The Defendant, Bobby V. Summers, appeals the trial court’s summary dismissal of his motions to correct an illegal sentence. The State has filed a motion asking this Court to affirm pursuant to Court of Criminal Appeals Rule 20. Said motion is hereby granted. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Justin Quistopher Webb v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, Justin Quistopher Webb, pled guilty to attempted first degree murder and theft of property and received a sentence of twenty years. Thereafter, he filed a petition for post-conviction relief, alleging that his plea counsel rendered ineffective assistance in failing to advise him of the significant consequences of the plea. After a hearing, the post-conviction court denied the petition by finding that plea counsel was not ineffective. On appeal, the Petitioner argues that the post-conviction court erred in denying his petition, asserting that he proved his allegations by clear and convincing evidence. Upon our review, we respectfully disagree and affirm the post-conviction court’s judgment. |
Robertson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Bobby Daniel Pettie
A Bedford County jury found the Defendant, Bobby Daniel Pettie, guilty of possession of a firearm with the intent to go armed during the commission of a dangerous felony, among other offenses. The court then imposed a six-year sentence for this conviction after implicitly finding that the Defendant had a qualifying prior felony conviction. Thereafter, the Defendant sought to have his sentence declared illegal pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 36.1, arguing that the jury did not find that he had a qualifying prior felony conviction. The trial court denied the motion, finding that the Defendant waived the jury’s determination of the issue. The Defendant appealed to this court. Upon our review, we respectfully affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Bedford | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Joseph E. Graham v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, Joseph E. Graham, appeals from the Montgomery County Circuit Court’s denial of post-conviction relief from his convictions for two counts of first degree felony murder, seven counts of especially aggravated kidnapping, five counts of attempted aggravated robbery, and one count of especially aggravated burglary and his effective sentence of life imprisonment plus twenty years. On appeal, the Petitioner contends that the post-conviction court erred by (1) denying relief on his ineffective assistance of counsel claim and (2) denying his motion for a continuance of the post-conviction hearing. We affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Montgomery | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Mickey Verchell Shanklin v. State of Tennessee
Petitioner, Mickey Verchell Shanklin, appeals the post-conviction court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief in which he challenged his convictions for the sale of heroin, the delivery of heroin, the sale of fentanyl, and the delivery of fentanyl and his effective sentence of thirty years of imprisonment as a Range III, persistent offender. On appeal, Petitioner asserts that trial counsel was ineffective in failing to submit the controlled substance for independent testing. Because Petitioner filed an untimely notice of appeal, we dismiss the appeal. |
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. William Wylie
A Maury County jury convicted the Defendant, William Wylie, of second degree murder, among other offenses. The trial court imposed a sentence of twenty years. On appeal, the State asks this court to dismiss the appeal because the Defendant’s notice of appeal was untimely. Upon our review, we agree that the Defendant’s notice of appeal was untimely and that the interest of justice does not require us to waive the timely filing requirement. We respectfully dismiss the appeal. |
Maury | Court of Criminal Appeals |
