COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OPINIONS

Roger Terry Johnson v. State of Tennessee
01C01-9705-CR-00172
Authoring Judge: Judge William M. Barker
Trial Court Judge: Judge J. Randall Wyatt

The appellant, Roger Terrance Johnson, appeals as of right from the Davidson County Criminal Court’s dismissal of his petition for post conviction relief. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee vs. Charlene Hardison - Concurring/Dissenting
01C01-9705-CC-00196
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Judge Henry Denmark Bell

I concur with a ll portions of Judge Lafferty’s op inion with the exception of the portion that reduces the period of confinem ent from six (6) months to ninety (90) days. I might agree with that ultimate result after a specific finding of facts by the trial court following the dictates of the Tennessee Criminal Sentencing Reform Act of 1989. However, it is my opinion that the more appropriate disposition of this particular case is to remand it back to the trial court for a new sentencing hearing which follows the specific requirements of the A ct. See State v. Ervin, 939 S.W.2d 581, 584-85 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1996) and cases cited therein.

State of Tennessee vs. Charlene Hardison
01C01-9705-CC-00196
Authoring Judge: Special Judge L. Terry Lafferty
Trial Court Judge: Judge Henry Denmark Bell

The defendant, Charlene Hardison, appeals of right from a ruling of the Williamson County Criminal Court in which the trial court imposed a sentence of six (6) months confinement in the Williamson County Jail for the offense of driving on a revoke d license. Also, the Williamson County Criminal Court consolidated an appeal of the defendant for violation of probation from the Williamson County General Sessions Court. After a sentencing hearing, the trial court upheld the judgment of the General Sessions Court and ordered the defendant to serve six (6) months, less forty-five (45) days credit, as per her plea of guilty, to run concurrently with the sentence for driving on a revoked license. Af ter a review of the entire r ecord, brief s of the parties and applicable law, we affirm the trial court’s judgment as to the revocation of probation, but remand the sentences as modified.

State of Tennesse vs. Samuel Lamb, Jr.
01C01-9703-CC-00095
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge W. Charles Lee

The appellant, Samuel L. Lamb, Jr., appeals as of right the sentencing decision of the Marshall County Circuit Court. Pursuant to a plea agreement, the appellant pled guilty to three counts of theft of property and received an effective five year sentence.1 Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court ordered that the appellant serve 270 days of this sentence in the county jail with the balance of the sentence to be served in the community corrections program. In this appeal, the appellant contends that the trial court erred by denying full probation or placement in community corrections. After review, we affirm.

State vs. Burl Jarrett
02C01-9710-CC-00418

State vs. Tammy Elliott
02C01-9803-CC-00070

State vs. Quentin Hall
02C01-9802-CR-00040

Conviction Was Affirmed By This Court. State v. Clonte J. Thomas, C.C.A. No.
02C01-9804-CR-00113

State vs. Mario Bowser
02C01-9803-CR-00093
Trial Court Judge: Carolyn Wade Blackett

State vs. Latoya Anderson
02C01-9707-CR-00251

State vs. Shirley Davis
W2000-00084-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry Smith
Trial Court Judge: Carolyn Wade Blackett
On December 3, 1998, a Shelby County Grand Jury indicted Shirley Davis, the Defendant and Appellant, for aggravated robbery. Following a jury trial, the Defendant was convicted as charged. After a subsequent sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced the Defendant to serve nine years incarceration. On appeal, the Defendant claims that the trial court erroneously enhanced her sentence. Although we find that the trial court erroneously applied a statutory enhancing factor, our de novo review reveals the existence of an applicable enhancing factor that was not applied by the trial court. This enhancement factor amply justifies the sentence imposed. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court's judgment.

State vs. Jeffrey Pewitt
01C01-9706-CR-00202
Trial Court Judge: Thomas H. Shriver

State vs. Craig Hazlett
01C01-9708-CC-00321
Trial Court Judge: W. Charles Lee

01C01-9704-CC-00159
01C01-9704-CC-00159
Trial Court Judge: William M. Barker

State vs. Lesa Malone
01C01-9706-CC-00234
Trial Court Judge: L. Terry Lafferty

01C01-9708-CR-00350
01C01-9708-CR-00350

State vs. Robert Fox
01C01-9710-CC-00471

Don Hancock vs. State
01C01-9710-CR-00489

Ricky Earls vs. State
01C01-9710-CR-00500

Julius Goodman vs. State
01C01-9712-CR-00562
Trial Court Judge: David H. Welles

State vs. Brown
03C01-9707-CR-00304
Trial Court Judge: James E. Beckner

Court. State v. Mitchell, 810 S.W.2D 733, 735 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1991). An Appellate Court
01C01-9803-CC-00139

State vs. Cedric Franklin
02C01-9710-CR-00380
Trial Court Judge: Joseph B. Dailey

State vs. Christopher Williams
02C01-9711-CR-00427
Trial Court Judge: Bernie Weinman

State vs. Christopher Williams
02C01-9711-CR-00427
Trial Court Judge: Bernie Weinman