Tony Mabry v. State of Tennessee
W2003-02197-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Judge Carolyn Wade Blackett

Petitioner, Tony Mabry, appeals the trial court’s dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief.  Petitioner argues that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance of counsel because she (1) failed to request a pre-trial voice line-up; (2) failed to cross-examine the victim about his prior statements to the police; and (3) failed to subpoena the police officer who took the victim’s initial statement to testify at trial. After a thorough review of the record, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Shelby Court of Criminal Appeals

Shirley Patricia Gilliam, Mother and next of kin of LaShun Hall, Decedent v. Michael G. Derrick, Administrator Ad Litem for the Estate of Santres A. Johnson, Decedent
W2003-01353-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Judge John R. McCarroll, Jr.

This is a wrongful death action. The plaintiff’s decedent was riding as a passenger in a car driven by the defendant’s decedent. The car collided at a high rate of speed into the guard rail of a bridge.  Both the driver and the passenger died in the accident. It was later determined that the driver was intoxicated, but that the passenger had not been drinking. The plaintiff, the mother of the passenger, filed this wrongful death action against the estate of the driver, alleging that the driver’s negligent conduct caused the death of her son. After a jury trial, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendant. The jury concluded that the passenger was 50% at fault for his demise, because the passenger knew or should have known that the driver was intoxicated when he got into the car. The plaintiff now appeals. We reverse, finding no material evidence to support the jury’s conclusion that the passenger knew or should have known that the driver was intoxicated.

Shelby Court of Appeals

William Glenn Wiley v. State of Tennessee
M2003-00661-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Judge Walter C. Kurtz

The post-conviction court ordered a new trial relating to the petitioner’s felony murder conviction for which he was sentenced to life without parole, but denied him relief regarding his especially aggravated robbery conviction. The state appeals, contending the post-conviction court erred in granting relief based upon the trial court’s failure to charge second degree murder as a lesser-included offense of felony murder. The petitioner cross-appeals, asserting: (1) he received ineffective assistance of counsel at the trial level; (2) he is entitled to relief based upon the results of DNA testing; (3) the trial court erred in failing to charge intoxication as a defense; (4) the trial court erred in admitting victim impact evidence and in failing to properly instruct the jury during the penalty phase; and (5) the trial court improperly instructed the jury regarding the prior violent felony aggravating circumstance. We affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

Davidson Court of Criminal Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Franklin Brooks
M2003-00896-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Judge Cheryl A. Blackburn

Defendant, Franklin D. Brooks, was indicted by the Davidson County Grand Jury for burglary, theft, and vandalism. Following a jury trial, Defendant was convicted of burglary, a Class D felony. Following a sentencing hearing, Defendant was sentenced as a Range II offender to serve seven years on community corrections. As a condition of his sentence, Defendant was ordered to complete the Lifelines program while incarcerated. Defendant appeals his sentence. We conclude that the trial court erred by sentencing Defendant to serve more than one year of his sentence of split confinement in continuous confinement. We also conclude that Defendant is entitled to receive credit for time served in confinement. Accordingly, we remand this case for entry of an Amended Judgment to allow credit for time served in confinement, and we modify the sentence, and order that Defendant be released from custody and placed on community corrections to serve the remainder of his sentence.

Davidson Court of Criminal Appeals

Bernie R. McGill v. State of Tennessee
E2004-00142-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge Richard R. Baumgartner

The Appellant, Bernie R. McGill, appeals the dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief by the Knox County Criminal Court. The post-conviction court concluded that it was without jurisdiction to review McGill's claims because the petition was filed outside the one-year limitation period. After review, we affirm the dismissal of the petition.

Knox Court of Criminal Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Freeman Antoine Hale
E2003-03009-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge Rebecca J. Stern

The Appellant, Freeman Antoine Hale, appeals from the judgment of the Hamilton County Criminal Court revoking his community corrections sentences. Hale pled guilty to aggravated burglary and possession of cocaine with intent to sell and received an effective three-year sentence. As a result of these convictions, he was placed on intensive probation but, following violations of release, he was resentenced to community corrections. Hale then proceeded to violate his community corrections agreement, and the trial court ordered him to serve the remainder of his sentences in the Department of Correction. On appeal, Hale asserts that the evidence was insufficient to establish that the violations occurred. After review, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Hamilton Court of Criminal Appeals

John E. Allen v. Quenton T. White, et al.
W2004-00457-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Judge Lee Moore

This appeal concerns the dismissal of a common law writ of certiorari by the Circuit Court of Lake County. Appellant, an inmate in the custody of the Tennessee Department of Correction, filed a pro se Petition for Writ of Certiorari to challenge the results of a prison disciplinary proceeding instituted against him. The trial court granted Appellee’s motion to dismiss the petition as untimely filed in violation of the applicable statute of limitations. For the reasons stated below, we affirm the decision of the trial court.

Lake Court of Appeals

Shari Parker Morrow, et al. v. Fay A. Jones
W2002-01088-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor D. J. Alissandratos

Plaintiff/Buyer brought a cause of action alleging breach of a real estate contract and seeking specific performance. The trial court entered judgment for Defendant/Seller. We affirm in part, modify in part, and remand.
 

Shelby Court of Appeals

Anthony Jerome Stokes v. State of Tennessee
E2002-02597-SC-R11-PC
Authoring Judge: Justice William M. Barker
Trial Court Judge: Honorable Douglas A. Meyer

After pleading guilty to two counts of murder, petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief attacking his sentences. Relief was denied by both the trial court and by the Court of Criminal Appeals. Thereafter, counsel for the petitioner neither withdrew nor filed an application for permission to appeal in this Court. Petitioner filed multiple other pleadings, including a second petition for post-conviction relief seeking a delayed appeal to this Court from the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals dismissing his first petition for post-conviction relief. The Court of Criminal Appeals granted an evidentiary hearing on the second petition for post-conviction relief, at which the trial court held that the petitioner had been denied due process by the actions of his counsel in failing to either withdraw or file an application for permission to appeal after the Court of Criminal Appeals' decision of the first petition. The Court of Criminal Appeals agreed. We reverse the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeals, holding that because there is no right to effective assistance of counsel in post-conviction proceedings, and because the petitioner was afforded a full evidentiary hearing and full review in his first-tier post-conviction appeal, there was no due process violation.

Hamilton Supreme Court

Rhonda Cary v. The Local Government Worker's
W2003-02339-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Allen W. Wallace, Sr.J.
Trial Court Judge: William Michael Maloan, Chancello
The issues presented to the trial court were: (1) whether the employee gave proper notice of her injury to employer pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated Section 5-6-21 and 22; (2) whether the employee sustained an injury by accident arising out of her employment with defendant on May 1, 2; (3) whether the employee retained any permanent anatomical impairment as a result of the alleged work injury. As discussed below, we affirm the trial court.

Obion Workers Compensation Panel

State of Tennessee v. Michael N. Allen, A/K/A Michael B. Carta in Re: Sanford and Sons Bail Bonds, Inc.
E2004-00292-CCA-R3-CD-
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge Lynn W. Brown

Sanford and Sons Bail Bonds, Inc., the appellant, appeals from the trial court’s denial of relief from
final forfeiture of its bond. At the hearing set to determine whether final forfeiture of the bond
should occur, the appellant did not appear and the trial court entered a judgment against the appellant declaring final forfeiture. The appellant then sought relief from the final forfeiture judgment, pursuant to Rule 60.02 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-11- 201(b), and sought a stay of execution of the judgment. Because the notice of appeal was not timely filed in this matter, we are without jurisdiction to determine whether the trial court erred in entering a final forfeiture against the appellant based upon its claim under Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-11-201(b). We further conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to grant a stay of execution or relief under Rule 60.02 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure. We affirm the judgment of the trial court

Washington Court of Criminal Appeals

Arzolia Charles Goines v. Warden Glen Turner
W2003-02281-CCA-R3-HC
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge Jon K. Blackwood

The Petitioner, Arzolia Charles Goines, appeals the trial court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief. The State has filed a motion requesting that this Court affirm the trial court's denial of relief pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals. Because Petitioner has failed to allege a ground for relief which would render the judgment void, we grant the State's motion and affirm the judgment of the lower court.

Hardeman Court of Criminal Appeals

Michael Addison v. Mr. Tony Parker, Warden
W2004-00032-CCA-R3-HC
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge R. Lee Moore Jr.

The Petitioner, Michael Addison, appeals the trial court's denial of his petition for habeas corpus relief. The State has filed a motion requesting that this Court affirm the trial court's denial of relief pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals. Because Petitioner has failed to allege a ground for relief which would render the judgment void, we grant the State's motion and affirm the judgment of the lower court.

Lake Court of Criminal Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Novella Beard
W2003-01646-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge Chris B. Craft

The defendant, Novella Beard, appeals from a conviction for aggravated robbery on the basis of insufficiency of the evidence and alleged error concerning jurors’ questions of witnesses. We find no reversible error and affirm the conviction.

Shelby Court of Criminal Appeals

Roger Hickman v. State of Tennessee
E2002-01916-SC-R11-PC
Authoring Judge: Justice Frank F. Drowota, III
Trial Court Judge: Judge Ray L. Jenkins

We granted Roger L. Hickman permission to appeal to consider whether the trial court and Court of Criminal Appeals erred in dismissing his habeas corpus petition. Hickman's petition, prepared with the aid of counsel, alleged that his 1986 misdemeanor conviction, for which he received a ten-day suspended sentence, is void because the judgment does not affirmatively indicate that Hickman was represented by counsel or that he waived his right to counsel. We hold that the trial court and Court of Criminal Appeals properly dismissed the petition. The petition failed to comply with the prescribed statutory form, failed to allege that Hickman is "imprisoned or restrained of his liberty," as required by Tennessee Code Annotated section 29-21-101 (2000), and failed to allege grounds for habeas corpus relief. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals.

Knox Supreme Court

Michael Ray Hailey v. E. W. James & Sons,
W2003-02499-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Joe C. Loser, Jr., Sp. J.
Trial Court Judge: William Michael Maloan, Chancellor
In this appeal, the Second Injury Fund insists the trial court erred in its apportionment of permanent total disability benefits 35 percent to the employer and 65 percent to the Second Injury Fund. As discussed below, the panel has concluded the judgment of the trial court should be modified by apportioning 1 percent of the disability benefits to the employer and none to the Second Injury Fund.

Obion Workers Compensation Panel

Charles W. Ayrhart v. Dewel B. Scruggs, et al.
M2003-00453-COA-R9-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Judge C. L. Rogers

This is an interlocutory appeal of the trial court's refusal to grant a summary judgment to the defendants in a negligence case. We find that the defendants have not affirmatively negated an element of this negligence claim and that reasonable minds could differ on the allocation of fault between the parties. Consequently, the defendant is not entitled to judgment as a matter of law. We therefore agree with the trial court and affirm the denial of summary judgment.

Sumner Court of Appeals

Carl Shockley v. Joseph F. Crosby, et al.
M2003-00794-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Judge Larry B. Stanley, Jr.

This appeal arises from a claim filed in Van Buren County Circuit Court alleging breach of contract, outrageous conduct, and assault. At the close of the plaintiff's proof, the trial court granted the defendants' motion for a directed verdict on the outrageous conduct claim. At the close of all the proof, the trial court granted the plaintiff's motion for a directed verdict on the breach of contract claim, and the parties then stipulated that the assault had occurred. The case went to the jury for consideration of the damages resulting from the breach and the assault. The jury returned a verdict of $57,500 for the breach of contract and specifically found that the assault did not cause injury to Carl Shockley for which compensatory damages should be awarded. Nonetheless the jury did find that Joseph Crosby acted in such a way that punitive damages should be awarded. The trial court refused to submit the punitive damages issue to the jury and granted a remittitur of $7,500 on the contract claim. Both parties appeal. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Van Buren Court of Appeals

State of Tennessee, ex rel. Paul G. Summers and Milton H. Hamilton, Jr. v. B&H Investments, Inc., Charles R. Smith and Alvin G. Pierce
M2003-01640-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel Pickens Franks
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.

The Trial Court held purchaser of land responsible for prior owner’s violations of the Tennessee
Water Quality Control Act. On appeal, we reverse in part, vacate in part and remand.
Tenn. R. App. P.3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Chancery Court Reversed in Part,
Vacated in Part, and Remanded.
 

Davidson Court of Appeals

Dorian Soriano Bautista v. State of Tennessee
M2002-01707-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Judge Lee Russell

The petitioner, Dorian Soriano Bautista, appeals from the Bedford County Circuit Court's dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief from his conviction for theft over one thousand dollars, a Class D felony. He contends that he received the ineffective assistance of counsel because his attorneys failed to explain to him the adverse consequences that his guilty plea and conviction could have on his resident alien status, which led to his deportation. We affirm the trial court.

Bedford Court of Criminal Appeals

Michaela Babb v. Hamilton County Board of Education
E2004-00782-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Sharon G. Lee
Trial Court Judge: Judge W. Neil Thomas, III

This is a suit brought by a school teacher against the Hamilton County Board of Education under the Tennessee Governmental Tort Liability Act wherein the teacher alleges negligence on the part of the Board of Education as a result of an assault on her by a student who was re-enrolled in school and re-placed in her classroom despite the fact the student had assaulted her the previous month and been suspended from school. The trial court granted the Board of Education's motion for summary judgment. We hold that the decision to place the student back in the teacher's classroom, despite the previous assault, was a discretionary action for which the Board of Education was immune from liability. Accordingly, we affirm and remand to the trial court.

Hamilton Court of Appeals

In Re: Estate of Frank Soard
E2004-01434-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Hugh E. Delozier, Jr.

This case involves a dispute between a widow and the personal representative of her husband’s estate. The parties differ as to the correct interpretation of Tenn. Code Ann. § 31-4-101 (2001), the statute setting forth the criteria pursuant to which a surviving spouse’s elective share is computed. The trial court adopted the estate’s construction of the statute and subtracted the widow’s exempt property, homestead allowance, and year’s support allowance from the value of her percentage share of the net estate in arriving at the elective-share amount to which she is entitled. We disagree with the trial court’s interpretation of the statute. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of that court.
 

Blount Court of Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Tony O. Johnson
W2003-02098-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Judge W. Fred Axley

The appellant, Tony O. Johnson, was convicted by a jury in the Shelby County Criminal Court of second degree murder. Following the appellant’s conviction, the trial court imposed a sentence of twenty-five years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction and the trial court’s application of certain enhancement factors. Upon our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Shelby Court of Criminal Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Tony Harp
W2003-01655-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge Joseph H. Walker, III

The Appellant, Tony Harp, was convicted in the Lauderdale County Circuit Court of one count of theft of property valued between $ 1,000 and $ 10,000, a class D felony. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court imposed a thirty-month community corrections sentence, with service of ninety days in the county jail. On appeal, Harp asserts that: (1) the evidence is insufficient to sustain the conviction and (2) the trial court erred in denying him full probation. After review of the record, we find no error and affirm the judgment of conviction and resulting sentence.

Lauderdale Court of Criminal Appeals

State of Tennessee v. John Mark Burns
W2003-01464-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Gary R. Wade
Trial Court Judge: Judge C. Creed McGinley

While initially indicted on three counts of attempted first degree murder, the defendant, John Mark Burns, was convicted on three counts of attempted second degree murder. The trial court imposed sentences of eleven years for each offense, all of which are to be served concurrently. In this appeal of right, the defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, he argues that the trial court erred in several of its instructions to the jury, and he contends that the sentence is excessive. Because the trial court erred in its application of certain enhancement factors, the defendant’s sentences are modified to three concurrent nine-year terms. Otherwise, the judgments of the trial court are affirmed.

Carroll Court of Criminal Appeals