State of Tennessee v. James Ray Bartlett

Following a jury trial, Defendant, James Ray Bartlett, was convicted of five counts of aggravated burglary, a Class C felony, four counts of theft of property valued between $1,000 and $10,000, a Class D felony, two counts of theft of property valued under $500, a Class A misdemeanor, one count of vandalism of property valued between $500 and $1,000, a Class E felony, and four counts of vandalism of property valued under $500, a Class A misdemeanor. The trial court sentenced defendant as a Range III, persistent offender, to ten years for each aggravated burglary conviction. The trial court sentenced defendant as a Range III, career offender to twelve years for each theft of property valued between $1,000 and $10,000 and to six years for his Class E felony conviction. The trial court sentenced defendant to eleven months, twenty-nine days for each misdemeanor conviction. On appeal, defendant argues that: (1) the trial court erred in not conducting a hearing on defendant's motion to suppress; (2) the trial court erred in denying defendant's motion to disqualify the District Attorney General's office from prosecuting this case; (3) the trial court erred by dismissing an African-American prospective juror from the panel pursuant to a peremptory challenge by the State; (4) the trial court erred in failing to grant defendant's motion for a mistrial; (5) the evidence is insufficient to support defendant's convictions of aggravated burglary and vandalism; and (6) the trial court erred in determining that defendant was a career offender for purposes of sentencing him in counts 6, 8, 10, 14, and 18 of the indictment. After review, we conclude that there is a conflict between the transcript of the sentencing hearing and the judgment forms concerning the trial court's imposition of consecutive sentencing. We accordingly remand to the trial court for correction of the judgments to accurately reflect the effective sentence of thirty years intended by the trial court. In all other aspects, the judgments of the trial court are affirmed.