State of Tennessee v. Roberto Vasques, Kevin Joel Hernandez, Luis Martin Vasquez, Hector Alonzo and Victor Hugo Garza

Our grant of the applications for permission to appeal filed by the State of  Tennessee and certain of the defendants was for the purpose of  determining (1) whether the evidence at trial was sufficient to support the convictions for conspiracy to possess with intent to sell more than seventy pounds of marijuana within one thousand feet of a school zone; (2) whether the waiver of lesser-included offense instructions under  Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-18-110 violates constitutional principles; and (3) whether the Court of Criminal Appeals applied the proper standard in affirming the grant of coram nobis relief to Vasquez and Garza, reversing the trial court, and denying the relief to Vasques,  Hernandez, and Alonzo. We conclude that the trial evidence was sufficient  to support the convictions and that the statutory waiver of the entitlement to complete jury instructions does not violate the right to a jury trial or the separation of powers principle. We also hold that Vasquez and Garza are entitled to a new trial based upon newly discovered evidence and that  Vasques, Hernandez, and Alonzo are not entitled to coram nobis relief. In consequence, the judgments of the Court of Criminal Appeals are affirmed.