Cooper Mgmt. vs. Performa Entertainment.
W2001-01134-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Robert A. Lanier
This appeal involves a chancery court's decision to hold an enjoined party in both civil and criminal contempt for failing to abide by an injunction. The injunction required the enjoined party to remove a tent structure from certain property within a reasonable time. The enjoined party was also ordered to refrain from placing further encroachments on the property. Following a petition for contempt, the court found that the enjoined party had failed to remove the tent structure within a reasonable time and had, instead, placed more items on the property. Accordingly, the court found the enjoined party in civil and criminal contempt. Under the civil contempt charge, the enjoined party was sentenced to jail until he complied with the court's order. For the criminal contempt charge, the court ordered the party to serve seven days in jail. Five days into the enjoined party's sentence, he complied with the court's order and was released on bond. He now appeals the remaining two days on his sentence. For the following reasons, we affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand this case to the chancery court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

State of Tennessee v. Steven David Brooks
E2001-00920-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Richard R. Baumgartner

A Knox County jury convicted the Defendant of three counts of rape of a child and of two counts of rape. The trial court sentenced the Defendant to twenty-three years for each rape of a child conviction and to ten years for each rape conviction. All sentences were to be served concurrently, for an effective sentence of twenty-three years. The Defendant now appeals, arguing the following: (1) that the trial court erred by not severing the offenses involving different victims, (2) that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to convict the Defendant of the charged offenses, and (3) that the cumulative error during the proceedings deprived the Defendant of a fair trial and due process of law. Concluding that the trial court's failure to sever the offenses was error and that the error was not harmless, we reverse the judgments of the trial court, sever the offenses by victim, and remand for new trials.

Gregory Fuller v. State of Tennessee
M2001-01271-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Judge Cheryl A. Blackburn

The petitioner, Gregory Fuller, appeals from the Davidson County Criminal Court's denial of his petition for post-conviction relief from his felony cocaine possession conviction and resulting fifteen-year sentence. He contends that the trial court erred in denying relief, claiming that (1) he received the ineffective assistance of counsel and (2) the trial court erred in denying his motion for a continuance. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Maurice Lashaun Nash
W2001-01703-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge Joseph H. Walker, III

The Appellant, Maurice Lashaun Nash, appeals his conviction by a Tipton County jury for facilitation of possession of marijuana, a schedule VI controlled substance, with intent to deliver, a class A misdemeanor. On appeal, Nash raises the following issues for our review: (1) whether the trial court erred by denying his motion to suppress, and (2) whether the evidence in the record is insufficient as a matter of law to sustain his conviction. After a review of the record, we find plain error in the trial court's instruction to the jury charging the offense of facilitation, as this lesser offense was not fairly raised by the evidence. Accordingly, Nash's conviction is reversed and remanded for a new trial upon the lesser offense of class A simple possession.

Ronnie Sykes v. Robbie Richardson
M2001-02097-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Don R. Ash
Tenured teacher filed a petition for review of board of education action discharging him from his teaching position. The trial court, the Honorable Don R. Ash, presiding by interchange, upheld the decision by the board of education. Petitioner appeals. We affirm.

Debra Bolin v. Carl Bolin
M2001-02168-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Carol A. Catalano
Wife filed for divorce soon after Husband was sentenced to four years in prison for causing the death of Son. The trial court granted Wife the divorce on the grounds of inappropriate marital conduct. The court also determined that section 31-1-106 of the Tennessee Code prohibited Husband from collecting his portion of Son's life insurance policy. We affirm the decision of the trial court.

James Cone, dec. by next friend Tim Cone v. State
M2001-02242-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
After his father was killed while crossing railroad tracks located in Sumner County, Tim Cone ("Plaintiff"), as next friend and on behalf of his father James R. Cone, sued the State of Tennessee ("Defendant") in the Claims Commission. Plaintiff claimed Defendant exercised control over the railroad crossing and was responsible for the dangerous condition at that crossing. Plaintiff also claimed Defendant negligently deprived James R. Cone of certain statutory rights. The Claims Commission granted Defendant's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted holding it did not have jurisdiction over Plaintiff's three claims. Plaintiff appeals. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand this case to the Claims Commission.

Marc A. Bland v. James M. Dukes, Warden
W2002-00579-CCA-R3-CO
Authoring Judge: Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Judge Joseph H. Walker, III

The petitioner, Marc A. Bland, appeals as of right the Lauderdale County Circuit Court's dismissal of his petition for habeas corpus relief. He contends that his judgments of conviction are void due to illegal sentences contained therein. We affirm the trial court's dismissal of the petition.

Eugene/Mark Selker vs. Russell Savory
W2001-00823-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: John R. Mccarroll, Jr.
This appeal involves a dismissed claim for malicious prosecution. The plaintiffs in the present action filed their complaint one year and thirty days after a final judgment was issued in the underlying suit. The defendants responded by filing separate motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim. The trial court sustained the defendants' motions, holding that the plaintiffs' claim was barred by the one year statute of limitations. The plaintiffs appealed and now argue that the statute of limitations on their claim did not begin to run until the applicable period for appeal in the underlying litigation expired. For the following reasons, we affirm the decision of the trial court.

Robert Lee Goss and Carl W. Hale v. State of Tennessee
W2001-02504-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge Joseph H. Walker, III

The Appellants, Robert Lee Goss and Carl W. Hale, were convicted by a Lauderdale County jury of first-degree murder and aggravated assault. They appeal as of right the judgment of the Lauderdale County Circuit Court denying their petitions for post-conviction relief. On appeal, the Appellants argue that trial counsel were ineffective because they did not pursue a defense of insanity and/or diminished capacity. After review of the record, we find that the Appellants received the effective assistance of counsel. Accordingly, the judgment of the post-conviction court is affirmed.

Giovanny Orpeau v. State of Tennessee - Order
M2002-00060-CCA-R3-CO
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes

The Appellant, Giovanny Morpeau, appeals from the denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus by the Wilson County Criminal Court. On November 2, 2001, the Appellant was arrested and charged with aggravated robbery. At the Appellant's initial appearance in the general sessions court on November 6, 2001, he was found indigent, bail was set at $50,000, and a preliminary hearing was scheduled for December 19, 2001. On November 29, 2001, the Appellant filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus seeking release from confinement upon grounds that his continued confinement beyond ten days, without being afforded a preliminary hearing, violated Rule 5(d) of the Tennessee Rules of Criminal Procedure.1 On November 30, 2001, the Appellant’s habeas corpus petition was denied. On December 10, 2001, the Appellant filed notice of appeal. On December 19, 2001, the Appellant's preliminary hearing was conducted in the general sessions court at which time he was bound over to the next term of the grand jury. During the January 2002 session of the Wilson County Criminal Court, the Appellant was indicted by the grand jury on one count of aggravated robbery.

Chad Daniel Easterly v. State of Tennessee
E2001-03042-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Judge James E. Beckner

The Defendant, Chad Daniel Easterly, pled guilty to kidnapping and evading arrest. The plea agreement included an effective eight year sentence as a Range I standard offender. The Defendant subsequently filed a post-conviction petition, alleging that his convictions were the result of ineffective assistance of counsel and prosecutorial misconduct. After a hearing, the trial court denied relief. The Defendant now appeals as of right. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

G.L. Vanhorn v. Dan Webb and Bryant M. Raines D/B/A Mickey's Late Night Party
M2001-00807-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly Kirby Lillard
Trial Court Judge: Judge Carol L. Soloman

This case arises from commercial property leases. The defendants operated a late night dance club on premises leased from the plaintiff. The plaintiff landlord unilaterally terminated the leases, changed the locks, and filed suit to recover for damage to the premises. While several pretrial motions were pending, the trial court scheduled the final hearing. The trial court found that the defendant tenants had a week-to-week oral lease and that the tenants violated the lease by engaging in illegal activity on the premises. On appeal, the defendant tenants argue that they were not given sufficient notice prior to the final hearing. We affirm, because the record does not show that the issues raised on appeal were presented to the trial court.

Clifford W. Russell, et al., v. Susan I. Russell
M2001-00926-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Frank G. Clement, Jr.

This appeal involves a will contest coupled with a suit to construe the same will. The trial court granted summary judgment to the proponent on the will contest and summary judgment to the contestants on the will construction issues. We hold that the issues cannot be resolved on summary judgment and reverse the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Perry Singo
M2001-00919-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Judge Allen W. Wallace
The defendant appeals his convictions for four counts of rape of a child and four counts of aggravated sexual battery, for which he received an effective sentence of 50 years, arguing: (1) his confession was involuntary; (2) the evidence was not sufficient to support his convictions; (3) the trial court erred in admitting sexually explicit photographs of the defendant depicting prior bad acts and improperly instructed the jury regarding consideration of the photographs; (4) the trial court improperly admitted defendant's letters and other writings; (5) the trial court improperly allowed a non-qualified witness to testify regarding certain matters; (6) the trial court failed to require the state to elect offenses; (7) the trial court erred in failing to charge the jury on simple assault as a lesser-included offense of aggravated sexual battery; and (8) the trial court erred in its oral response to a question posed by the deliberating jury. The state concedes the evidence is insufficient to support three of the child rape convictions, and we agree. We find no other reversible error. Therefore, we reverse and dismiss these three convictions and affirm all other convictions. We remand to the trial court for a redetermination of concurrent/consecutive sentencing.

State of Tennessee v. Luis Anthony Ramon - Dissenting
W2001-00389-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Judge Julian P. Guinn

Given the present state of the law, I respectfully disagree with the result reached in the majority opinion. I believe that it was the jury’s prerogative to discredit some or all of the defendant’s experts’ testimony and to conclude that their testimony did not prove by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant could not appreciate the wrongfulness of his conduct.

State of Tennessee v. Luis Anthony Ramon
W2001-00389-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Julian P. Guinn

The Henry County Grand Jury indicted the fifteen-year-old Defendant for first degree murder. The Defendant was tried as an adult and convicted of the charged offense. The trial court sentenced the Defendant to life imprisonment. The Defendant now appeals, arguing that his insanity defense was established by clear and convincing evidence. After a thorough review of the record, we reverse the judgment of conviction, modify the judgment to “Not Guilty by Reason of Insanity,” and remand for further proceedings pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated § 33-7-303.

Russell Epperson v. State of Tennessee
W2001-02579-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge Clayburn L. Peeples

The petitioner appeals the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief from his convictions for facilitation of aggravated rape, facilitation of especially aggravated kidnapping, facilitation of especially aggravated robbery, and aggravated burglary, raising three claims: (1) that he was denied the effective assistance of trial counsel; (2) that his guilty plea was involuntary; and (3) that the indictment was fatally defective. We affirm the post-conviction court's denial of the petition.

State of Tennessee v. Jimmy Byrd
E2001-01955-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Judge Buddy D. Perry

The defendant pled guilty to two counts of Class D felony theft over $1,000 and was sentenced to the community corrections program for an effective period of three years. The trial court subsequently revoked his community corrections sentence and resentenced the defendant to consecutive sentences of four years on each count as a Range I standard offender, for an effective eight-year sentence. On appeal, the defendant contends (1) the proof was insufficient to revoke his community corrections sentence; and (2) the sentence is excessive. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Anthony Lee Smith
E2001-02333-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Judge Rebecca J. Stern

A Hamilton County jury convicted the defendant of burglary and theft under $500. He received consecutive sentences of 10 years as a Range III offender and 11 months and 29 days, respectively. The defendant contends (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions; (2) the trial court erred in allowing the state to present a property receipt into evidence in lieu of coins found in the defendant's possession; (3) the prosecutor made improper remarks during closing argument; and (4) the trial court erred in ordering consecutive sentences. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Jack DeForest Bolden
E2001-02846-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Judge Richard R. Baumgartner

The defendant entered a guilty plea to Class D felony forgery and Class D felony theft for an agreed effective six-year sentence with the issue of alternative sentencing to be determined by the trial court. The trial court denied alternative sentencing. On appeal, the defendant contests the denial of community corrections. We affirm.

State of Tennessee v. Anthony Gentry, II
E2001-02728-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Judge Robert E. Cupp

The defendant entered a negotiated plea of guilty to two counts of sale of schedule II narcotics for agreed concurrent sentences of four years for each count, with the issue of alternative sentencing to be determined by the trial court. The trial court sentenced the defendant to four years incarceration. In this appeal, the defendant contends he should have received alternative sentencing. We affirm.

Michael O. Brown v. State of Tennessee
M2001-00917-CCA-MR3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge W. Charles Lee

The petitioner, Michael O. Brown, appeals the Lincoln County Circuit Court’s denial of postconviction relief. In his post-conviction petition, he challenged his 1996 conviction of selling cocaine by alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel. Because the record supports the trial court’s denial of post-conviction relief, we affirm.

Michael O. Brown v. State of Tennessee - Concurring
M2001-00917-CCA-MR3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Judge W. Charles Lee

I agree with the results reached and most of the reasoning used in the majority opinion. I respectfully disagree, though, with its view of the trial court’s limiting the issues raised by the petitioner. The majority opinion states that the record reflects that the petitioner abandoned issues that were not mentioned at the beginning of the hearing. The majority concludes that the trial court’s request that his attorney define the issues in contention, the attorney’s response, and the state’s objection for lack of notice justified the trial court’s sustaining the state’s objection regarding the Jencks Act issue. I view neither the record nor the trial court’s discretion  to authorize the trial court’s actions regarding this issue.

Johnny O. Clark v. State of Tennessee
W2001-02856-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge John P. Colton, Jr.

The petitioner appeals as of right from the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief from his conviction for first degree murder, contending that: (1) he was denied the effective assistance of trial counsel; (2) the post-conviction court erred by refusing to admit the affidavit of a deceased potential defense witness into evidence at the post-conviction evidentiary hearing; and (3) the post-conviction court and post-conviction counsel erred by their failure to comply with provisions of the Post-Conviction Procedure Act and Supreme Court Rule 28. We affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court denying the petition for post-conviction relief.