State vs. John Thomas
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Myron Garmon
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Roger Kimmel
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Roger Kimmel
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
03C01-9703-CR-00098
|
Sullivan | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. John Roe
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Cavious Watkins
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Mitchell vs. State
|
Johnson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Logan vs. State
|
Hawkins | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
McDonald vs. State
|
Bradley | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee vs. Venson Earl Woodard
A Bedford County Circuit Court jury found Appellant Venson Woodard guilty of two counts of aggravated assault. As a Range II multiple offender, he received a sentence of nine years and eight months in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The trial court ordered the sentence to be served consecutive to a sente nce for which Appellant was on parole at the tim e of the offense. In this appeal, Appellant presents the following issue for review: whether the trial court violated its duty to act as a thirteenth juror by refusing to grant Appellant’s motion for a new trial. Specifically Appellant maintains the weight of the evidence shows he was acting in self-defense. After a review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial co urt. |
Bedford | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee vs. Buffy Twadell
The defendant, Buffy Mae Twadell, has been indicted on two counts of aggravated perjury. Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-16-703. The district attorney general denied the defendant's application for pretrial diversion. Thereafter, the trial court denied her petition for a writ of certiorari. In this extraordinary appeal made pursuant to Rule 10 of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure, the defendant insists that the district attorney general abused his discretion by the denial of pretrial diversion. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Sumner | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Phillip Pomeroy vs. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Phillip W. Pomeroy, appeals the trial court's dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. The single issue presented for review is whether the petition is barred by the statute of limitations. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Tyrone Watkins
The defendant, Tyrone Watkins, was convicted on July 18, 1994, of two Class A misdemeanors. While allowing pretrial jail credit, the trial court imposed consecutive sentences of eleven months and twenty-nine days, the remainder of which was to be served on probation. On February 16, 1996, a warrant was issued which resulted in the revocation of probation. The question of law certified for review is whether the probationary term had expired prior to the commencement of the revocation proceeding. Rule 37(b)(2)(i), Tenn. R. Crim. P. We must reverse the judgment of the trial court; the cause is dismissed. |
Sumner | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Dennis P. Neilan vs. State of Tennessee
The appellant, Dennis P. Neilan, appeals from the judgment of the Sevier County Circuit Court which dismissed, without hearing, his petition seeking postconviction relief. We affirm the trial court pursuant to Rule 20 of the Rules of the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals. |
Sevier | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Tracy Stigall
Defendant, Tracey E. Stigall, was convicted by a Shelby County jury of the offense of aggravated burglary. The sole issue in this direct appeal is whether the trial court erred in failing to charge lesser offenses. We AFFIRM the judgment of the trial court. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee vs. Gerome J. Smith
The Defendant, Gerome J. Smith, appeals as of right from a conviction of first degree murder following a jury trial in the Sumner County Criminal Court. Defendant was subsequently sentenced to life imprisonment. In this appeal, Defendant argues that the evidence is insufficient as a matter of law to allow a rational trier of fact to conclude that the Defendant committed premeditated firstdegree murder. We affirm the judgment of the trial co urt. |
Court of Criminal Appeals | ||
State of Tennessee vs. Ricky Krantz
The defendant, Ricky Hill Krantz, appeals as of right from his conviction by a jury in the Davidson County Criminal Court for felony murder and aggravated assault, a Class C Felony. The defendant was sentenced to life imprisonment for the felony murder conviction and as a Range II, multiple offender to seven years in the custody of the Department of Correction for the aggravated assault conviction. The trial court ordered the defendant’s sentences to be served consecutively. The defendant contends that:
|
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee vs. Robert Allen McKenzie
The issue which this court must resolve is whether the statute of limitations commences in an accessory after the fact prosecution when (a) the crime is committed or (b) the principal offender is convicted. The trial court found the statute of limitations does not commence until the principal offender is convicted. The defendant contends the statute of limitations commences when the crime of accessory after the fact is committed. After a thorough review of the record, the briefs submitted by the parties, and the law pertaining to the issue presented for review, it is the opinion of this court the statute of limitations commenced to run in this prosecution for accessory after the fact when the offense was committed. Therefore, the judgment of the trial court is reversed and the prosecution is dismissed since the prosecution was barred by the statute of limitations. |
Sumner | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee vs. Rogers L. McKinley
The appellant, Rogers L. McKinley, appeals the Bledsoe County Criminal Court’s dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. In 1990, the appellant entered guilty pleas and was convicted of two counts of rape and one count of aggravated burglary. The trial court sentenced the appellant as a Range II multiple offender to concurrent sentences of fifteen (15) years for each rape and ten (10) years for the aggravated burglary. No direct appeal was taken from those convictions and sentences.
|
Bledsoe | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee vs. Freddie King
The appellant, Freddie King (petitioner), appeals as of right from a judgment of the trial court dismissing his action for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. In this court, the petitioner contends (a) his guilty pleas were not voluntarily, intelligently, and understandingly entered and (b) the trial court failed to advise him of his constitutional right against self-incrimination before questioning him during the submission hearing. After a thorough review of the record, the briefs submitted by the parties, and the law governing the issues presented for review, it is the opinion of this court that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed. |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Keith Henderson
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Reginald Thompson
|
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Clyde Edgeston
|
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State vs. Richard Patterson , et al
|
Henry | Court of Criminal Appeals |