Martin Door & Window v. Thomas Donegan d/b/a The Construction Team
M2001-01230-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Sr. Judge William H. Inman
Trial Court Judge: Charles K. Smith

Martin Door & Window v. Thomas Donegan d/b/a The Construction Team
M2001-01230-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Sr. Judge William H. Inman
Trial Court Judge: Charles K. Smith

M2001-01735-COA-R3-JV
M2001-01735-COA-R3-JV
Authoring Judge: Sr. Judge William H. Inman
Trial Court Judge: Tim Brock

Calvin Tankesly v. Sgt. Pugh, et al.
M2000-01520-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle

State of Tennessee v. Carolyn A. Wooster
02992-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Gary R. Wade
Trial Court Judge: Judge Leonard W. Martin

The defendant, Carolyn A. Wooster, was convicted of aggravated child abuse and neglect, a Class A felony. The trial court imposed a sentence of 15 years. In this appeal, the defendant asserts that (1) the evidence was insufficient to support her conviction and (2) the trial court’s failure to give an augmented unanimity instruction was reversible error. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

State of Tennessee v. Antonio Coach
W2001-01673-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge R. Lee Moore Jr.

The Appellant, Antonio Coach, appeals from the Lake County Circuit Court's denial of his pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus. On appeal, Coach asserts that the trial court's summary dismissal of his petition for writ of habeas corpus without requiring the State to file a responsive pleading was error. Coach further asserts that his sentence is void because the juvenile court failed to make findings of fact before his transfer to circuit court. After review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Larry Ammons
W2001-00834-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge Joseph H. Walker, III

The defendant was convicted in 1993 of three counts of aggravated burglary, and the trial court imposed three concurrent three-year sentences. In 1995, the defendant was convicted of one count of burglary and five counts of aggravated burglary. The trial court imposed a four-year sentence for the burglary count and six-year concurrent sentences for each of the aggravated burglary counts. The defendant's latter sentences were to be served consecutively to his previous three-year sentence, with probation granted as to all sentences. Subsequently, a petition to revoke the defendant's probation was filed, alleging that the defendant had failed to report to his probation officer and failed to pay restitution as ordered. Following a hearing, the court revoked the probation, and the defendant timely appealed. On appeal, the defendant claims that there was insufficient evidence to revoke his probation, that his due process rights were violated, and that he received ineffective assistance of counsel during his probation revocation hearing. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court but remand for entry of a corrected order revoking probation only as to Docket No. 6112.

State of Tennessee v. Rodney M. Butler
W2001-01084-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Judge Donald H. Allen

The Defendant, Rodney M. Butler, was indicted by a Madison County grand jury for one count of unlawfully driving or being in physical control of a motor vehicle while under the influence of an intoxicant, one count of unlawfully driving or controlling a motor vehicle with a blood or breath alcohol concentration of .10% or more, and one count of driving under the influence, fourth offense. The Defendant was convicted on all three counts. The trial court merged counts one and two into count three, and, after a sentencing hearing, sentenced the Defendant as a Range II offender to four years in the Department of Correction and reduced the jury-imposed fine of $15,000 to $10,000. On appeal, the Defendant contends that the evidence was insufficient to prove that he was in physical control of the motor vehicle and also contends that he was improperly sentenced. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Timmy Fulton v. State of Tennessee
W2001-01402-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge Joseph H. Walker, III

The Appellant, Timmy Fulton, appeals from the Lauderdale County Circuit Court's dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. In October of 1996, Fulton was convicted of second degree murder and sentenced to twenty-two years in the Department of Correction. On appeal, Fulton contends that he received ineffective assistance of counsel at trial based upon: (1) trial counsel's failure to investigate and determine his competency to stand trial or to investigate a diminished capacity defense; and (2) trial counsel's failure to adequately investigate the facts and interview material factual witnesses "in preparation of a possible factual defense." After review, we affirm.

State of Tennessee v. Roger Neal James and George Osborne Wade
W2000-01301-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge William B. Acree

Following a consolidated trial, an Obion County Jury convicted Defendant Roger Neal James of the delivery of a controlled substance within 1,000 feet of a school. The jury convicted Defendant George Osborne Wade of the sale of a controlled substance within 1,000 feet of a school. The trial court sentenced Defendant James to twenty-five years incarceration and Defendant Wade to twenty-three years incarceration. Both Defendants now appeal. Defendant James contests the sufficiency of the convicting evidence, the admission at trial of evidence concerning a second drug transaction that took place after the transaction in this case, and the length of his sentence. Defendant Wade also contests the sufficiency of the convicting evidence. In addition, he argues that the trial court erred by refusing to grant a continuance of the case and that the Drug-Free School Zone Act is unconstitutional as applied to his case. After review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Raymond Griffin - Concurring and Dissenting
W2000-01332-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Gary R. Wade
Trial Court Judge: Judge Joseph B. Dailey

I agree with the majority opinion except that I would hold that the defendant’s dual convictions for the especially aggravated kidnapping and aggravated robbery of Larry Smith do not violate due process. I would, therefore, affirm the especially aggravated kidnapping conviction.

State of Tennessee v. Alfonzo Williams
W2001-00452-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Judge Arthur T. Bennett

The defendant was indicted for one count of first degree murder during the perpetration of an attempted robbery and one count of premeditated first degree murder. A Shelby County jury found the defendant guilty of felony murder in count one and the lesser-included offense of second degree murder in count two. The trial court merged the second degree murder conviction into the conviction for felony murder, and the defendant was sentenced to life imprisonment. In this appeal, the defendant alleges: (1) the evidence was insufficient to sustain his convictions; (2) the trial court erroneously neglected to charge the jury on the offenses of second degree murder, voluntary manslaughter, reckless homicide, and criminally negligent homicide as lesser-included offenses of felony murder; and (3) the trial court failed to perform its duties as the "thirteenth juror." After a thorough review of the record, we conclude the trial court erred by failing to charge lesser-included offenses of felony murder. We affirm the guilty verdict for second degree murder; we reverse the conviction for felony murder and remand that count for a new trial with special instructions relating to the second degree murder verdict.

State of Tennessee v. Mack A. O'Baner
W2001-00815-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Judge Chris B. Craft

The Defendant, Mack A. O'Baner, was convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. On appeal, the Defendant contends that the evidence presented at trial is insufficient to support a finding of guilty of first degree murder beyond a reasonable doubt. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Raymond Griffin
W2001-01332-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge Joseph B. Dailey
The Appellant, Raymond Griffin, was convicted after a trial by jury of twenty-five offenses; two especially aggravated kidnappings, sixteen aggravated robberies, five aggravated burglaries, and two aggravated assaults. Griffin received an effective two-hundred and seventy-year sentence. On appeal, Griffin raises the following issues for our review: (1) whether the trial court erred in admitting his statements into evidence; (2) whether the trial court erred in joining the eight separate criminal episodes for trial; (3) whether the confinement of the victims was essentially incidental to accomplishment of the aggravated robberies and, therefore, sufficient to support separate convictions for especially aggravated kidnapping; (4) whether the evidence was sufficient to support his convictions; and (5) whether the trial court erred in ordering him to serve his sentences consecutively. After review, we find that the trial court erred in joining the eight criminal episodes for trial; however, such error was harmless. We also reverse and dismiss one conviction for especially aggravated kidnapping because the confinement of the victim was essentially incidental to the accomplishment of the aggravated robbery, thereby reducing Griffin’s sentence to an effective two-hundred and forty years. Griffin’s remaining issues are without merit. Accordingly, the judgments of the Shelby County Criminal Court in all other respects are affirmed.

State of Tennessee v. Jaxie Raymond Jones
E2001-00188-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Judge Robert E. Cupp

In these consolidated appeals, the Appellant, Jaxie Raymond Jones, has appealed from orders of the criminal courts of Washington County and Johnson County. His "Motion For Order Directing Joe C. Crumley, 1st Judicial District Attorney General To Produce To Jaxie Raymond Jones, A Copy Of The Entire Case File Of Case No. 14189" was denied. Subsequently, a motion to "alter or amend judgment" was also denied, with the trial court imposing sanctions pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated sections 41-21-801 through -818. Upon review of the entire record, we affirm the judgments of each trial court insofar as each order denies the motion. However, we reverse the order of the Johnson County Criminal Court insofar as it imposes sanctions pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated sections 41-21-801 through -818.

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., et al v. Daniel Wilson
M2000-02978-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Hon. J.O. Bond, Judge
Trial Court Judge: Hon. J.O. Bond, Judge
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The trial court awarded permanent partial disability benefits based on the functional equivalent of 4% to the employee's left arm and 6% to his right arm. The court based its findings upon the conclusions of a local doctor not presented as a panel option to the employee. The employer contends that the trial court erred in 1) interpreting the appropriate composition for a medical panel under Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6- 24 and (2) assessing permanent partial disability benefits. As discussed below, the Panel has concluded that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed on both issues. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e)(3) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Criminal Court Affirmed. GAYDEN, Sp. J. delivered the opinion of the Panel, in which DROWOTA, J., and LOSER, Sp. J. joined. Allen, Kopet & Boyd, PLLC Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Farrar & Holliman Lafayette, Tennessee, for the appellee, Daniel Wilson. 1 MEMORANDUM OPINION The employee/appellee, Daniel Wilson, is a thirty-nine-year-old male with a sixth grade education. Mr. Wilson never passed the G.E.D. and claims to have no special skills or training. His work experience has been limited to labor work. Mr. Wilson worked for Wal-Mart, Inc., as a stocker for the dairy department in the Gallatin, Tennessee store. On or about July 17, 1998, he began to experience elbow pains while opening boxes of juice and stocking the dairy department. He described his injuries as tendonitis of the elbow from repetitious work. Before his employment with Wal-Mart, Mr. Wilson had never sustained an injury to his right or left arm. Wal-Mart, the employer-appellant, provided Mr. Wilson with a panel of three physicians as provided by Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-24(a)(4) for the July 17 injury. From this panel, Drs. Sanders and Cowden treated Mr. Wilson. He returned to work on light duty on August 25, 1998, and full duty on September 2, 1998. Upon returning to work on full duty, Mr. Wilson reported a second aggravating injury to his arms. When he sought treatment, Dr. Cowden advised him to visit an orthopaedic physician. Pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-24(a)(4), Wal-Mart presented Wilson with a separate panel of three orthopaedic physicians, all of who practiced in a neighboring community. Mr. Wilson saw Dr. McInnis, who diagnosed bilateral tennis elbow and ultimately performed surgery on both of Mr. Wilson's elbows. Dr. McInnis assigned Mr. Wilson permanent restrictions of less than 2 pounds and a permanent partial disability of 5% to each arm. After surgery, Mr. Wilson continued to complain of elbow discomfort and sought additional treatment from Dr. Calvin Dyer, a local orthopaedic surgeon not included as a panel option. In accordance with AMA guidelines, Dr. Dyer performed a detailed examination before diagnosing epicondylitus. Dr. Dyer measured Mr. Wilson's range of motion and tested his grip strength. Based upon this test, Dr. Dyer assigned a permanent partial impairment rating of 1% to each arm. He also assigned permanent lifting restrictions of less than thirty pounds. The trial court used the conclusions of Dr. Dyer, rather than those of Dr. McInnis, to award permanent partial disability benefits to the Mr. Wilson in the amount of $34,66.. The court assigned a 4% permanent partial disability rating to the Mr. Wilson's left arm and a 6% permanent partial disability rating to his right arm. Appellate review is de novo upon the record of the trial court, accompanied by a presumption of the correctness of the findings of fact, unless the preponderance of the evidence is otherwise. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e)(2). Panel composition is determined in accordance 2

Quantreal Underwood v. State of Tennessee
W2000-01774-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith
Trial Court Judge: Judge Carolyn Wade Blackett

The appellant, Quantreal Underwood, was convicted of second degree murder and two counts of aggravated robbery. He received a Range I sentence of twenty-five years for the murder conviction and two concurrent eight year terms for the robbery convictions. His convictions and sentences were affirmed by this Court on direct appeal. State v. Quantreal Underwood, No. 02C01-9604-CR-00120, 1997 Tenn. Crim. App. Lexis 1018 (Tenn. Crim. App. at Jackson Oct. 9, 1997). The appellant filed a post-conviction petition in May, 1999, wherein he alleged that his trial counsel was ineffective and thus deficient within the meaning of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution. That petition was denied, and the appellant now brings the instant appeal. We have reviewed the record and find no error. Therefore, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Cynthia C. Warren
W2000-02261-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Judge Bernie Weinman

A Shelby County jury found the defendant guilty of driving under the influence. In this appeal, the defendant alleges (1) the evidence was insufficient to sustain her conviction; (2) the trial judge erroneously allowed the arresting officer to opine the defendant's blood alcohol level was greater than .10%; and (3) the trial court erroneously failed to charge adult driving while impaired as a lesser-included offense of DUI. After review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Glen Tucker vs. Steve Howell
W2001-00999-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Ron E. Harmon
Plaintiff home owner sued defendant construction company for damages resulting from defendant's failure to complete construction of plaintiffs' home. The Chancery Court of Decatur County, Tennessee entered judgment in favor of the plaintiffs in the amount of $17,057.00. Defendant has appealed. We dismiss the appeal.

State of Tennessee v. Donald Richard Harmon, Jr., and Charles Leonard Golden
E2001-01506-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Gary R Wade
Trial Court Judge: Judge James E. Beckner

The defendants, Donald Richard Harmon, Jr., and Charles Leonard Golden were convicted of theft over $1,000.00 but less than $10,000.00. See Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 39-14-103, 105(3).The trial court imposed Range I, two-year sentences for each defendant. Each has appealed, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence and alleging as error the limitation of cross-examination of a state witness. The defendant Harmon argues that he should have been granted an alternative sentence.  The cause is remanded as to the sentencing of the defendant Harmon; otherwise, the judgments of the trial court are affirmed.

Ralph Thompson, Jr. v. State of Tennessee
E2001-00003-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge Ben W. Hooper, II

The petitioner appeals the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief, arguing that the post-conviction court erred in finding that he received effective assistance of trial counsel. The complaints against trial counsel were as to their alleged failure to prepare adequately for trial, to interview and present certain witnesses, and to present an adequate defense. After a careful review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court dismissing the petition.

Eric Brooks v. State of Tennessee
M2000-02139-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Judge Seth W. Norman

The Defendant, Eric Brooks, pled guilty to the sale of a controlled substance and received a sentence of twelve years to be served on Community Corrections. The Defendant was subsequently arrested and his case officer filed an affidavit indicating that his arrest constituted a violation of his Community Corrections program. A hearing was held, at which the Defendant was represented by counsel, and the trial judge revoked the Defendant's Community Corrections sentence, re-sentencing him to fourteen years in the Department of Correction. The Defendant subsequently filed a petition for post-conviction relief, which the trial court eventually dismissed summarily. The Defendant now appeals from that dismissal. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. James Noble Page
M2001-01853-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Judge John H. Gasaway, III

The juvenile defendant, fifteen-year-old James Noble Page, was tried as an adult for second degree murder and convicted as charged by a Montgomery County jury. The specific issue in this appeal is whether the trial court erred in instructing the jury on the "knowing" mens rea element of second degree murder. The trial court instructed the jury that the "knowing" element of second degree murder could be established by defendant's awareness "(1) that his conduct is of a particular nature; or (2) that a particular circumstance exists; or (3) that the conduct was reasonably certain to cause the result." (Emphasis added). The state concedes the instruction was error but contends it was harmless. We conclude second degree murder is a result-of-conduct offense; allowing the jury to convict based upon awareness of the nature of the conduct or circumstances surrounding the conduct erroneously lessens the state's burden of proof for this offense; the error in the jury charge was not harmless under the facts of this case; and the conviction must be reversed and the case remanded for a new trial.

State of Tennessee v. Nelson Troglin
E2001-00251-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Judge Thomas W. Graham

The defendant, Nelson Troglin, was convicted of second degree murder following a jury trial in the Bledsoe County Circuit Court. The trial court subsequently imposed a sentence of twenty-three years. In this appeal, Defendant raises the following issues: (1) whether the evidence was sufficient to support his conviction; (2) whether the trial court erred by ruling that Defendant's statement to the police was admissible as evidence during his trial; (3) whether comments made by the trial court during curative instructions to the jury constituted impermissible expressions of bias toward Defendant, effectively depriving him of his right to a fair trial; (4) whether the trial court erred when it excluded evidence that a person, not Defendant, had assaulted the victim on the day of his death, and when it allowed an expert to testify concerning evidence which was not revealed to Defendant during regular discovery; (5) whether the trial court erred by failing to instruct the jury on the lesser-included offenses of reckless homicide and criminally negligent homicide; and (6) whether the sentence imposed by the trial court was excessive. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. John David White
M2001-00336-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Judge L. Terry Lafferty

The defendant, John David White, was convicted by a jury in the Rutherford County Circuit Court for aggravated burglary, theft of property valued over $1,000, felony evading arrest, vandalism, and driving while his license was suspended. He was sentenced to a total of twenty-one years in the Department of Correction as a career offender. In this appeal, the defendant contends (1) that the trial court should have suppressed evidence obtained from the stop of his truck and (2) that the trial court erred in instructing the jury relative to flight from crime. We affirm the trial court.