I concur in the result reached by the majority, particularly the excellent analysis pertaining to the confrontation clauses of the federal and state constitutions; however, I would have affirmed that portion of the opinion by the Court of Criminal Appeals holding that the article of clothing containing semen identified as that of the defendant was properly admitted as evidence, despite any weakness in the chain of custody. In my view, the majority places an inordinate degree of emphasis on the initial link in the chain and falls short of affording the trial judge adequate deference under our limited scope of review. Because, however, other evidence offered by the State violated constitutional principles, and the errors were not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, I agree that a new trial is warranted.
Case Number
E2005-01237-SC-R11-CD
Originating Judge
Judge Rebecca J. Stern
Case Name
State of Tennessee v. Kacy Dewayne Cannon - Concurring
Date Filed
Dissent or Concur
This is a dissenting opinion
Download PDF Version
CannonConc.pdf72.88 KB