The defendant, Erwin Scott Patterson, entered pleas of guilt to three counts of vehicular assault, reckless endangerment, and violation of the driver's license law. A charge of driving under the influence of an intoxicant was dismissed. The trial court imposed a sentence of four years for one count of vehicular assault, two years for the remaining vehicular assault convictions, two years for reckless endangerment, and 30 days for violation of the driver's license law. An application for alternative sentencing was denied. In this appeal, the defendant contends that the four-year sentence for vehicular assault was excessive and that the trial court erred by denying an alternative sentence. The judgments are affirmed as modified.
The defendant contests his conviction and sentence for aggravated sexual battery. We conclude the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction, the seven-year-old victim was competent to testify, venue was properly established, proper chain of custody for the DNA evidence was established, and the amendment of the indictment was proper. Accordingly, we affirm the defendant's conviction. A review of the defendant's sentence reveals the trial court misapplied enhancing factor (8). There being two enhancing factors and one mitigating factor applicable to the defendant's sentence, the judgment is modified from the maximum of twelve years to eleven years.
James L. Carrethers appeals his second-degree murder conviction. He was found guilty of that offense by a Davidson County Jury. He is presently serving an eighteen-year sentence in the Department of Correction for the crime. In this direct appeal, he claims that the evidence does not sufficiently support the conviction and that the lower court erred in denying a motion to suppress his inculpatory, pretrial statements. Because we are unconvinced of error in either respect, we affirm.
The Appellant, Michael George Medina, appeals his conviction by a Smith County jury finding him guilty of first-degree murder. On appeal, Medina challenges (1) the sufficiency of the convicting evidence, as it relates to the element of premeditation, and (2) the trial court's ruling which he asserts interfered with the defense's order of proof, thus, "forcing a premature election on defendant's right to testify." After review, we find no error. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.
Smith
Court of Criminal Appeals
State of Tennessee v. Christopher Duwan Robertson M2001-00976-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Judge Cheryl A. Blackburn
The defendant, Christopher Duwan Robertson, appeals as of right from his conviction by a jury in the Davidson County Criminal Court of first degree, premeditated murder. The defendant received a sentence of life imprisonment with the possibility of parole. He contends that (1) the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction, (2) the trial court erroneously failed to instruct the jury to determine whether witnesses Karen Mullins and Michael Simpson were accomplices as a matter of fact, and (3) the trial court should have granted a mistrial after the victim's mother testified that the defendant had committed another murder. We affirm the trial court's judgment of conviction.
Petitioner appeals the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. He was originally convicted of felony murder and attempted especially aggravated robbery and received an effective life sentence. He now contends he received ineffective assistance of counsel at his jury trial. We conclude otherwise and affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Davidson
Court of Criminal Appeals
State of Tennessee v. Lonnie Keith Dishner E2001-00870-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith
Trial Court Judge: James E. Beckner
The appellant was convicted at a jury trial of the offense of felonious reckless endangerment. He was sentenced to a term of one year imprisonment in the Greene County workhouse. In this appeal the appellant claims that the indictment is defective, that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict, and that the prosecution improperly commented in closing argument that the appellant should have produced a certain tape recording. After a review of the record we are of the opinion that the indictment and evidence are constitutionally sufficient to support the verdict. We are also of the opinion that the appellant has waived any error concerning closing argument by failing to include the transcript of the arguments in the record. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Greene
Court of Criminal Appeals
State of Tennessee v. Treca Finchum E2001-01072-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Richard R. Vance
A Sevier County jury convicted the Defendant of theft of property valued over $500 and of contributing to the delinquency of a minor. The trial court sentenced the Defendant as a Range I, standard offender to two years for the theft conviction and to eleven months and twenty-nine days for the contributing to the delinquency of a minor conviction, to run concurrently. The trial court also ordered sentences of split confinement, with the Defendant to serve ninety days in jail, "day for day," and the balance of each sentence to be served on supervised probation. The Defendant now appeals, arguing the following: (1) that insufficient evidence was presented at trial to convict her of theft and of contributing to the delinquency of a minor; (2) that the admission into evidence of a list of items stolen from Wal-Mart was inadmissible hearsay; (3) that the trial court committed reversible error by excluding a statement against interest from an unavailable witness; and (4) that the trial court erred in sentencing her. After a review of the record, we affirm the judgments of the trial court as modified.
Sevier
Court of Criminal Appeals
State of Tennessee v. Ralph Taylor Hopson E2001-02113-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Judge E. Shayne Sexton
Defendant, Ralph Taylor Hopson, was indicted by the Grand Jury of Claiborne County for one count of second degree murder and one count of attempted second degree murder. Prior to trial, Defendant stated his desire to waive his right to representation by counsel and requested to proceed pro se. Four days later, the trial court conducted an inquiry into Defendant’s ability to represent himself and granted his request. Following a jury trial, Defendant was convicted of the offenses charged. The trial court subsequently sentenced Defendant to twenty-five years for the second degree murder conviction and ten years for the attempt conviction, to be served concurrently. In this appeal, Defendant challenges both convictions on the ground that the waiver of his right to counsel was not knowingly and intelligently made. In addition, Defendant contends that his sentence for the second degree murder conviction is excessive. After a review of the record and applicable law, we conclude that Defendant did not knowingly and intelligently waive his right to counsel and that the trial court erred in determining Defendant’s sentences. Accordingly, we reverse the judgments of the trial court and remand this matter for a new trial.
The Defendant, Clayton Eugene Turner, brings this appeal from the trial court's denial of post-conviction relief. The Defendant was convicted by a jury of rape of a child, incest, and assault. He argues two issues in this appeal: (1) that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel at trial, and (2) that the trial court erred by denying the Defendant's post-conviction request for the appointment of experts in the fields of DNA analysis and the transmission of infectious diseases. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Sullivan
Court of Criminal Appeals
Larry Parrish vs. Robert Marquis E2004-00875-COA-RM-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Dale C. Workman
In this malicious prosecution case the Appellants, Larry E. Parrish and Larry E. Parrish, P.C., contend that the Knox County Circuit Court erred in granting motions for summary judgment filed by the Appellees, Robert S. Marquis and Ronald C. Koksal. We reverse the Circuit Court's judgment of dismissal as to Mr. Koksal and we affirm the Circuit Court's judgment of dismissal as to Mr. Marquis on alternative grounds.
Knox
Court of Appeals
Floyd Woody vs. Joy Woody E2001-02078-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Thomas R. Frierson, II
In this case from the Chancery Court of Hamblen County the Appellant, Floyd Michael Woody contends that the Trial Court erred in amending a final judgment for divorce to include one half of his pension fund as part of the marital property to be awarded the Appellee, Joy Darlene Woody. The judgment of the Trial Court is affirmed as modified.
Hamblen
Court of Appeals
Dept. of Children's Srvcs vs. T.M.K. E2000-02840-COA-R3-JV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: John B. Hagler, Jr.
The State of Tennessee, through the Department of Children's Services, seeks to terminate the parental rights of T.M.K. and G.L.K., as to their children, E.K. (d.o.b. 1/3/88), C.K. (d.o.b. 1/17/90), and twin daughters, A.K. and E.K. (d.o.b. 5/4/92). The Trial Court found the State had carried the burden of proof by clear and convincing evidence as to grounds for termination, as well as the best interest of the children. We affirm.
The petitioner, Natasha W. Cornett, appeals the trial court's denial of post-conviction relief. The issues presented for our review are (1) whether the petitioner properly waived her right to a jury trial at sentencing; (2) whether her guilty pleas to three counts of first degree murder, one count of attempted first degree murder, two counts of especially aggravated kidnapping, two counts of aggravated kidnapping, and one count of theft over $1,000 were knowingly and voluntarily entered; and (3) whether the petitioner was denied the effective assistance of counsel. The judgment is affirmed.
Greene
Court of Criminal Appeals
Larry Parrish vs. Robert Marquis E2002-01131-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Dale C. Workman
In this appeal from the Circuit Court for Knox County the Appellants, Larry E. Parrish and Larry E. Parrish, P.C., contend that the Trial Court erred in dismissing their cause of action upon grounds that it was not timely filed under T.C.A. 28-1-105(a). We affirm the judgment of the Trial Court.
Knox
Court of Appeals
State vs. Steven Arrington E2002-00249-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: James E. Beckner
In this case from the Greene County Criminal Court the Appellant, Steven Keith Arrington, a juvenile, contends that there was insufficient evidence to support the jury's finding that he was guilty of aggravated kidnaping. Mr. Arrington also asserts that, assuming his conviction was proper, the Trial Court erred in failing to sentence him to an indeterminate commitment. We affirm the judgment of the Trial Court and remand.
Greene
Court of Appeals
Alvin Mays vs. Helen Mays E2001-02630-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Thomas R. Frierson, II
In post-divorce action, the Trial Court changed from the mother to the father, the role as primary custodian of the minor child. On appeal, we affirm.
The defendant, Jonathan Thornton, was convicted of one count of theft of property valued at more than $1,000 but less than $10,000 and one count of theft of property valued at less than $500. The trial court imposed concurrent sentences of two years and 11 months and 29 days, respectively. In this appeal of right, the defendant asserts (1) that the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions, (2) that the trial court erred in its instructions to the jury, and (3) that the trial court erred by denying an alternative sentence. Because the trial court erred by denying an alternative sentence, the defendant's sentence is modified to a sentence of split confinement with nine months to be served in confinement and the balance to be served on probation.
Greene
Court of Criminal Appeals
William Duty vs. Joseph Daugherty E2001-02861-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Billy Joe White
In this boundary line dispute, the Trial Court established the boundary line between the parties' properties based on testimony that prior owners had agreed on the location of the boundary, which altered the boundary established by an accurate survey. We reverse.
Scott
Court of Appeals
Billy Allan Braswell, et ux vs. AC and S, Inc., et al E2002-00093-COA-R9-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Wheeler A. Rosenbalm
The trial court allowed plaintiff to add seller as party to products liability action more than one year after injury and denied seller summary judgment on defense of the statute of limitations. We affirm.
Knox
Court of Appeals
The Oceanics Schools vs. Clifford Barbour, Jr. E2002-00181-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Sharon J. Bell
This matter is before us on the petition of the plaintiff for a rehearing pursuant to Tenn. R. App. P. 39.
Knox
Court of Appeals
State of Tennessee v. Wanda Hinson - Dissenting M2000-02762-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Judge Timothy L. Easter
I am unable to agree that the trial court’s error in admitting the victim’s hearsay statement is harmless error. I believe the error requires reversal of the conviction, and I therefore dissent.
The appellant, Alan Parrigan, was convicted of the offense of aggravated sexual battery. He received a sentence of ten years incarceration to be served consecutively to a sentence he was serving at the time of the commission of the instant offense. On appeal he raises three errors for our consideration. First, the appellant maintains that the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury on the lesser included offenses of child abuse and neglect. Second, he alleges that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict. Finally, the appellant contends consecutive sentencing is unwarranted in his case. After a thorough review of the record, we find that although the failure to instruct the jury on the lesser-included offenses of child abuse and neglect was error, the error is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. In addition, we find that the evidence is sufficient to support the verdict and that consecutive sentencing is fully supported by the record. Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Wayne
Court of Criminal Appeals
State of Tennessee v. Wanda Hinson M2000-02762-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith
Trial Court Judge: Judge Timothy L. Easter
A Lewis County jury convicted the defendant, Wanda Hinson, of criminally negligent homicide, for which she received a one and a half year sentence, and especially aggravated burglary, for which she received a twenty-two year sentence. The trial court ordered the defendant to serve these sentences concurrently. The defendant now appeals her convictions, alleging (1) that the trial court erred by admitting a hearsay statement, (2) that the trial court erred by failing to grant a mistrial when the state improperly impeached the defendant’s only alibi witness, (3) that the evidence is insufficient to support her convictions, and (4) that the trial court erred by failing to grant the defendant a new trial based on the state’s failure to provide certain exculpatory evidence. For the reasons outlined below, we find that none of these allegations merit relief and accordingly affirm the decision of the trial court.
Lewis
Court of Criminal Appeals
Don Birchfield v. Hardwood Frames of America E2001-02123-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Thayer, Sp. J.
Trial Court Judge: Jerri S. Bryant, Chancellor
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann._ 5-6-225 (e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The trial court dismissed the complaint finding the action was not filed within the one year period of the statute of limitations. Judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e) (1999) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Chancery Court is Affirmed THAYER, SP. J., in which ANDERSON, J., and BYERS, SR. J., joined. Jimmy W. Bilbo, of Cleveland, Tennessee, for Appellant, Don Birchfield. Kent T. Jones, of Chattanooga, Tennessee, for Appellee, Hardwood Frames of America. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff, Don Birchfield, has appealed from the trial court's action in dismissing his complaint. The court ruled the action had not been filed within the one year period provided by the statute of limitations. Basic Facts Employee Birchfield was forty-one years of age and had completed the eleventh grade in school. He later obtained a GED certificate. On October 15, 1998, while employed by the defendant, Hardwood Frames of America, he was working on an assembly line when a load of wood pinned him against a metal buggy. He was sent to a medical facility, Health Works of Tennessee, where he was seen on several occasions. X- rays revealed a fracture in his right arm. He later saw Dr. Rickey Hutcheson for four visits from October 3, 1998 to February 5, 1999. Birchfield testified he never returned to work after the accident because he was on strong pain medication and because he had constant pain in his elbow and some numbness in his hand. His employer paid for his treatment at Health Works and for seeing and being treated by Dr. Hutcheson. It was stipulated that the last payment of a medical expense was in August 1999. During his employment career, he has had other workers' compensation claims with different employers and the record indicates he has other health problems for which he is being treated. The complaint was filed on January 16, 21, which was 27 months after the accident and over 16 months after the payment of a last medical expense. Medical Evidence Dr. Rickey Hutcheson, an orthopedic surgeon practicing in Cleveland, Tennessee, testified by deposition. He stated he examined the x-ray which was taken at Health Works and thought it might be an old fracture. He said he had mild swelling and his elbow was bruised. After several visits he released him to return to light duty work but did not realize until later that he did not go back to work. On a later visit during November 1999, he said the employee could straighten his arm completely and seemed to not have as much pain. The doctor was of the opinion he did not have any permanent impairment. Dr. Frank H. Wood, a family practice and emergency medicine physician practicing in McCoysville, Georgia, testified by deposition. He began seeing the employee on February 1, 1999 for some of his other health problems and he stated he was not given a history about any injury to his elbow until late October or early November 2. He initially testified the employee had a 1 percent impairment as a result of the accident in question but admitted he had not looked at the AMA Guidelines for two to three years. He said he had been using the 1987 Edition and had never seen the 4th Edition. During the examination he was given the 4th Edition and changed his opinion several times concerning impairment. As we read the record, he appeared to finally settle on 6 percent impairment to the right arm or 3 percent to the whole body. Other questions and answers indicated he was fixing a percentage of disability rather than impairment to the body as he was considering the employee's age, education, job opportunities, etc. Findings of Trial Court The trial judge was very troubled by the evidence of Dr. Wood and specifically found she could not rely on same. The complaint was dismissed because the statute of limitations had expired. -2-
