Latoya Danielle Patton v. State of Tennessee
M2009-01280-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge Cheryl Blackburn

The petitioner, Latoya Danielle Patton, appeals the Davidson County Criminal Court's denial of her petition for post-conviction relief. The petitioner, pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, pled guilty to second degree murder, a Class A felony, and received a sentence of forty years. On appeal, the petitioner contends that her guilty plea was not knowingly and voluntarily entered due to the ineffective assistance of counsel in advising the petitioner. Following review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

Justin Rashard Forrest v. State of Tennessee
W2009-00827-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge J.C. Mc:in
Trial Court Judge: Judge Roy Morgan

The petitioner, Justin Rashard Forrest, appeals the judgment of the Madison County Circuit Court denying his petition for post-conviction relief. Pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, the petitioner pleaded guilty to aggravated burglary, especially aggravated kidnapping, and three counts of aggravated robbery in case number 07-337; aggravated burglary and theft in case number 07-285; and possession of marijuana and especially aggravated robbery in 07-286. The trial court sentenced him to an effective sentence of fifteen years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief alleging the ineffective assistance of counsel, and the post-conviction court denied his petition. On appeal, the petitioner contends that the post-conviction court erred when it denied his petition for post-conviction relief. After review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

State of Tennessee v. Stevie Leonard Kelly
M2009-01269-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: John Everett Williams, J.
Trial Court Judge: John H. Gasaway, Judge

The defendant, Stevie Leonard Kelly, appeals the sentencing decision of the Montgomery County Circuit Court. The defendant pled guilty to one count of possession of a Schedule II controlled substance and two counts of evading arrest. He was subsequently sentenced to concurrent sentences of ten years for the drug conviction and five years for each evading arrest. The trial court further ordered that the effective ten-year sentence be served in the Department of Correction consecutive to sentences for which the defendant was found to be in violation of probation. On appeal, the defendant challenges the sentences, specifically contending that: (1) the trial court improperly weighed the enhancing and mitigating factors in determining the sentence lengths; (2) the court erred in ordering that the sentences be served in confinement; and (3) consecutive sentencing was improperly imposed. Following review of the record, we conclude that: (1) a challenge based upon the weighing of enhancement or mitigating factors is no longer a ground for appeal; (2) no abuse of discretion resulted from the court's decision that confinement was necessary because measures less restrictive than confinement had recently been applied; and (3) no abuse of discretion resulted from the court's decision to impose consecutive sentencing based upon the fact that the defendant was on probation at the time the offenses were committed. Accordingly, we affirm the sentences as imposed.

State of Tennessee v. Quincy Bryan Banks
M2009-00421-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge James Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Seth Norman

The defendant, Quincy Bryan Banks, appeals the consecutive-sentencing decision of the Davidson County Criminal Court, which was imposed following remand from the Court of Criminal Appeals for resentencing. See State v. Quincy Bryan Banks, No. M2007-00545-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App., Nashville, Apr. 11, 2008). Upon our de novo review of the order of consecutive sentencing without a presumption of correctness, we vacate the judgments of the trial court and remand for further sentencing proceedings.

State of Tennessee v. Bykeem Bret Jenkins
E2009-01755-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge James Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge David R. Duggan

The defendant, Bykeem Bret Jenkins, pleaded guilty in 2007 in the Blount County Circuit Court to possession of marijuana with intent to deliver, a Class E felony, and received a two-year suspended sentence. In response to a timely petition for violation of the defendant's probation, the trial court revoked the probation and ordered the defendant to serve his sentence in the Department of Correction. The defendant appeals from the order of confinement. We affirm the trial court's order.

Chase Manhattan Mortgage Corporation v. Ida B. Street
W2007-02553-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Arnold B. Goldin

In 1991, Ms. Street executed a note and deed of trust in favor of National Bank of Commerce. National Bank of Commerce immediately assigned the deed of trust to Troy & Nichols, Inc. In 1994, Chase acquired Troy & Nichols, and in 2003, National Bank of Commerce released the deed of trust. Chase brought suit claiming that the deed of trust had been erroneously released, seeking to rescind the releases and to reinstate the deed of trust. The trial court granted summary judgment to Chase, and we affirm.

State of Tennessee v. Elgy Smith
W2008-02812-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge John P. Colton, Jr.

A Shelby County jury convicted the Defendant, Elgy Smith, of possession of .5 grams or more of cocaine with the intent to sell, and possession of .5 grams or more of cocaine with the intent to deliver, both Class B felonies; possession of marijuana with the intent to sell, and possession of marijuana with the intent to deliver, both Class E felonies. At sentencing, the trial court merged each pair of convictions and sentenced the Defendant to twenty-five persistent offender for the cocaine offense and five years as a Range III, persistent offender for the marijuana offense. Finding the Defendant to be a professional criminal, the trial court also ordered the sentences to be served consecutively for a total effective sentence of thirty years incarceration. In this appeal as of right, the Defendant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions and that his sentence is excessive. Following our review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

John H. Key, II, and Wanda Morrison v. Carolyn Lyle, et al
M2009-01328-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Laurence M. McMillan, Jr.

Appellees, as shareholders, leased a commercial building and property from a relative. When the relative died, the property was left to numerous heirs, including Appellees and the non-shareholder Appellants, and Appellee Carolyn Lyle was named property manager. Appellees fell behind on their rent owed pursuant to the lease, but ultimately repaid the arrearage, and disbursements were made to the property co-owners. Appellants sued, claiming that Lyle should be removed as property manager, that she was obligated to declare the lease in default and to re-let the property, and that the Appellees breached their fiduciary duties to the other property co-owners. The trial court denied Appellants' claims, and we affirm.

Charles Owens v. State of Tennessee
M2009-00558-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith
Trial Court Judge: Judge J. Randall Wyatt, Jr.

Petitioner, Charles Owens, was convicted by a Davidson County jury of six counts of aggravated sexual battery. He received a sentence of twenty-four years. State v. Charles Owens, No. M2005-02571-CCA-R3-CD, 2007 WL 1094136, at *1 (Tenn. Crim. App., at Nashville, Apr. 12, 2007), perm. app. denied, (Tenn. Aug. 20, 2007). Petitioner's convictions were affirmed on appeal. Id. Petitioner subsequently sought post-conviction relief on the basis of alleged ineffective assistance of counsel. After an evidentiary hearing,the post-conviction court denied the petition for relief. Petitioner appeals, arguing that the post-conviction court improperly denied the petition for relief. We agree with the post-conviction court that Petitioner failed to show that he received ineffective assistance of counsel for counsel's failure to object to various things at trial, in part because this Court had already determined on direct appeal that the alleged "prosecutorial misconduct" at trial did not affect the outcome of trial. Accordingly, because we determine that the post-conviction court properly dismissed the petition for post-conviction relief, the judgment of the post-conviction court is affirmed.

State of Tennessee v. Robert Christopher Dial
M2008-02330-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith
Trial Court Judge: Judge Stella Hargrove

In Maury County on June 17, 2002, Appellant pled guilty to two counts of attempted aggravated sexual battery. He was sentenced to two six-year sentences to be served consecutively. He was placed on probation. After violating probation, he was placed on Community Corrections. On July 10, 2008, Appellant's Community Corrections officer filed a violation report. After a hearing, the trial court revoked Appellants Community Corrections sentence and ordered him to serve his full twelve year sentence. On appeal, Appellant argues that the trial court abused it discretion in revoking his Community Corrections sentence and that the trial court did not have authority to impose the full twelve year sentence. We conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in revoking the Community Corrections sentence. However, we agree with Appellant that he had previously served the first six-year consecutive sentence, and the trial court can only impose the remaining six-year sentence. Therefore, we affirm the revocation of the Community Corrections sentence, and modify Appellant's sentence to six years.

Michelle Shoemaker v. State of Tennessee
M2009-00472-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith
Trial Court Judge: Judge John D. Wootten, Jr.

Petitioner, Michelle Shoemaker, was unsuccessful in her direct appeal to this Court from her convictions in Jackson County for first degree murder, conspiracy and tampering with evidence. These convictions resulted in an effective life sentence. See State v. Michelle Shoemaker, No. M2005-02652-CCA-R3-CD, 2006 WL 3095446 (Tenn. Crim. App., at Nashville, Nov. 2, 2006), perm. app. denied, (Tenn. March 12, 2007). Following her unsuccessful direct appeal, she filed a petition for post-conviction relief alleging that she was afforded ineffective assistance of counsel by both her trial and appellate counsel. After conducting an evidentiary hearing on the post-conviction petition, the post-conviction court denied the petition. Petitioner now appeals the post-conviction court's denial of her petition. After a thorough review of the record, we conclude that Petitioner has been unable to prove that either trial or appellate counsel were ineffective. Therefore, we affirm the post-conviction court's denial of the petition.

State of Tennessee v. Antonio Vaughn
M2008-01067-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J.C. McLin
Trial Court Judge: Judge Cheryl A. Blackburn

A Davidson County jury found the defendant, Antonio Vaughn, guilty of possession of not less than one-half ounce nor more than ten pounds of marijuana with intent to sell or deliver within one thousand feet of a school, a class D felony. The trial court sentenced him, as a Range III career offender, to serve 12 years, at 100 percent, in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, he challenges the sufficiency of the convicting evidence and the denial of his motion for a mistrial. After reviewing the parties' briefs, the record, and applicable law, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Joseph Kevin Adams v. Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance Company
W2009-00931-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Judge Roy B. Morgan, Jr.

The plaintiff made a claim under his homeowner’s insurance policy after his house burned. The insurer denied the claim because, after the policy was issued, the plaintiff deeded the property to his sons so that it would pass to them if he died, and he did not notify the insurer. The plaintiff sued the insurer for breach of contract. The insurer claimed that the plaintiff had no insurable interest in the property, that he breached a “warranty of ownership” under the policy, that he had a duty to disclose the change of ownership after the policy issued, and that he violated a provision of the policy addressing concealment and fraud. The trial court ruled in favor of the plaintiff and ordered the insurer to pay him approximately $72,000 in accordance with the policy limits. The trial court also awarded discretionary costs to the plaintiff, but it denied the plaintiff’s request for prejudgment interest. The insurer appeals, claiming that the plaintiff was not entitled to recover under the policy for various reasons, and that the trial court erred in awarding the plaintiff discretionary costs. The plaintiff contends that the trial court erred in declining to award prejudgment interest. We affirm the trial court’s award pursuant to the insurance policy and its award of discretionary costs, and we vacate the portion of the judgment denying the request for prejudgment interest and remand for such an award.

Samantha Mackus Knight v. James Darrell Mackus
W2009-01099-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Judge Karen R. Williams

At the parties’ divorce, Mother was named primary residential parent of their minor child and Father was allowed visitation. The parties continued living together for approximately one year following their divorce, and thereafter, they exercised alternating one-week visitation for  approximately one year. Father petitioned to be named primary residential parent citing his increased visitation with the child as a material change in circumstances. The trial court denied his petition without making the findings required by Tennessee Code Annotated section 36-6-101(a)(2)(B)(i). We vacate the trial court’s order denying Father’s petition, and we remand to the trial court with instructions to make the necessary findings and then to render its decision accordingly.

State of Tennessee v. Harry Richard
W2008-02458-CCA- R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Camille R. McMullen
Trial Court Judge: Judge Carolyn Wade Blackett

The Defendant-Appellant, Harry Richard, pled guilty in the Criminal Court of Shelby County to driving while under the influence of an intoxicant, a Class A misdemeanor. He was sentenced to eleven months and twenty-nine days in a county workhouse. This sentence was suspended, and Richard was ordered to serve eleven months and twenty-eight days on probation. He was also assessed a six hundred dollar fine and ordered to pay fifteen dollars in other fees. Richard claims on appeal that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress. Pursuant to Rule 37 of the Tennessee Rules of Criminal Procedure, he reserved the following certified questions of law: (1) “Whether there was reasonable suspicion for a traffic stop for speeding”; (2) “Whether there was probable cause to arrest Harry Richard for DUI”; and (3) “Whether placing Harry Richard in the back of the squad car was a ‘brief detention’ in this instance.” Upon review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
 

George Hardin v. Jim Morrow, Warden
E2009-01946-CCA-R3-HC
Authoring Judge: Judge D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Thomas W. Graham

The Petitioner, George Hardin, appeals as of right from the Bledsoe County Circuit Court's order summarily dismissing his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. The State has filed a motion requesting that this court affirm the order pursuant to Rule 20 of the Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals. The Petitioner seeks to re-litigate a previously litigated claim. Accordingly, the State's motion is granted and the judgment of the habeas corpus court is affirmed.

Jeffery T. Siler, Jr. v. State of Tennessee
E2009-00436-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Camille R. McMullen
Trial Court Judge: Judge Mary Beth Leibowitz

The Petitioner, Jeffery T. Siler, Jr., appeals the Knox County Criminal Court's summary dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief as untimely. On appeal, the Petitioner contends that due process considerations toll the one-year statute of limitations for postconviction relief and entitle him to a delayed appeal. Upon review, we reverse the judgment of the post-conviction court.

Erodito D. Lopez-Carranza v. State of Tennessee
M2009-01712-CCA-R3-HC
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Judge James Martin

The Petitioner, Erodito D. Lopez-Carranza, was charged with one count of aggravated sexual battery, a Class B felony. See Tenn. Code Ann. _ 39-13-504(b). On May 2, 2005, he pleaded guilty to one count of attempted aggravated sexual battery, accepting an out-of-range sentence of seven years in the Department of Correction, to be served as a multiple offender at thirty-five percent. On July 6, 2009, the Petitioner filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus in the Circuit Court for Hickman County. On July 24, 2009, the State filed a motion to dismiss the petition. The habeas corpus court granted the motion. The Petitioner now appeals that grant. We affirm the judgment of the habeas corpus court.

State of Tennessee v. Brian David Black
E2009-01622-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Judge Rebecca J. Stern

The Defendant, Brian David Black, appeals from the Hamilton County Criminal Court's order revoking his probation for theft of property over $500, a Class E felony, and ordering him to serve his three-year sentence in the Department of Correction. He argues that the trial court erred in ordering his sentence to be served, rather than imposing some less severe sanction. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Marquentis Johnson
W2009-01065-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J.C. McLin
Trial Court Judge: Judge Donald H. Allen

The defendant, Marquentis Johnson, pleaded guilty on June 20, 2005 to two counts of theft over $1,000, Class D felonies, and one count of theft over $500, a Class E felony, pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement. The trial court sentenced him as a standard offender to four years for each count of theft over $1,000 and two years for theft over $500, to be served concurrently for an effective sentence of four years in Community Corrections. The Circuit Court of Madison County revoked the defendant's community corrections sentence and resentenced him as a standard offender to serve each sentence consecutively, for an effective sentence of ten years, in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the defendant challenges the circuit court's imposition of consecutive sentencing. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the circuit court.

State of Tennessee v. Steve Carl King
M2008-01251-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Robert L. Jones

A Giles County jury convicted the Defendant, Steve Carl King, of attempted first degree murder, and the trial court sentenced him to twenty-two years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal the Defendant contends: (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction; (2) the trial court erred when it admitted statements the Defendant gave to Illinois police; (3) the trial court erred when it allowed two witnesses to testify although the State had failed to disclose their existence in accordance with Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 16; and (4) the trial court erred when it denied the Defendant's petition for a writ of error coram nobis based on the victim's recanted testimony. After a thorough review of the record and the applicable law, we affirm the trial court's judgments.

State of Tennessee v. Bruce Elliot
M2008-02686-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge James Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Steve Dozier

A Davidson County Criminal Court jury convicted the defendant, Bruce Elliot, of conspiracy to possess 300 grams or more of cocaine, see T.C.A. _ 39-17-417(j)(5) (2006); possession of 300 grams or more of cocaine, see id. _ 39-17-417(j)(5); possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, see id. _ 39-17-1307(b)(1)(a); possession of one-half ounce or more of marijuana, see id. _ 39-17-417(g)(1); conspiracy to deliver 300 grams or more of cocaine within 1,000 feet of a school, see id. _ 39-17-417(j)(5), -432; and money laundering, see id. _ 39-14-903. The trial court imposed an effective sentence of 66 years' incarceration. In this appeal, the defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, argues that the trial court should not have permitted a State's witness to testify regarding "drug jargon," contends that the trial court erred by denying his motion to suppress evidence seized during a search of the defendant's apartment, and claims various errors in his sentencing. Discerning no error, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Joseph Brennan
M2009-00895-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: David H. Welles, J.
Trial Court Judge: Dee David Gay, Judge
The Defendant, Joseph Brennan, was charged with two counts of rape of a child, a Class A felony, and two counts of incest, a Class C felony. See Tenn. Code Ann. __ 39-13-522(b)(1), -15-302(b). He pleaded guilty to two counts of incest and two counts of attempted rape of a child, a Class B felony. See Tenn. Code Ann. _ 39-12-107(a). In accordance with his plea agreement, the trial court sentenced the Defendant, as a Range I, standard offender, to ten years for each attempted rape of a child conviction and three years for each incest conviction, his sentences for attempted rape of a child to be served consecutively to each other and concurrent with his incest sentences, for a total effective sentence of twenty years. Following the Defendant's sentencing hearing, the trial court ordered service of his full sentence in the Department of Correction. In this direct appeal, the Defendant contends that the trial court erred in denying him a sentence of split confinement. After our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Derrick D. Futch v. State of Tennessee
W2009-01678-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: J.C. Mclin, J.
Trial Court Judge: Lee V. Coffee, Judge
The petitioner, Derrick D. Futch, pleaded guilty to aggravated sexual battery, a Class B felony. The trial court sentenced him to 8 years, at 100 percent, in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief, which the post-conviction court summarily dismissed. The petitioner appeals the summary dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. After a review of the record, the parties' briefs, and applicable law, we reverse the judgment of the post-conviction court and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Dedrick Lamont Patton v. State of Tennessee
M2009-01472-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Judge Don Ash

Following a bench trial, the Petitioner, Dedrick Lamont Patton, was convicted of one count of possession with intent to sell twenty-six grams or more of cocaine, a Class B felony. See Tenn. Code Ann. _ 39-17-417(i)(5). On January 5, 2009, he filed a petition for postconviction relief, alleging a number of grounds. A hearing was held on this petition on June 15, 2009. The post-conviction court denied the Petitioner relief in an order dated June 18, 2009. The Petitioner now appeals, contending that the post-conviction court erred in denying him relief because: (1) the post-conviction court, which also served as the Petitioner's trial court, and the post-conviction Assistant District Attorney, who also served as Assistant District Attorney at the Petitioner's trial, failed to recuse themselves; (2) he received the ineffective assistance of counsel at trial; (3) the State failed to disclose exculpatory evidence to the defense; (4) the trial court committed judicial misconduct; (5) the trial court, Assistant District Attorney, and trial counsel colluded against the Petitioner in violation of his rights under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution; and (6) the cumulative effect of these errors denied the Petitioner his right to a fair trial. After our review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.