Christina Fortenberry vs. G.T.George
|
Knox | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Roger Edward Edwards
Defendant appeals the trial court's denial of defendant's request to withdraw his guilty plea and motion for a new trial. On appeal, defendant has two assertions: (1) he received ineffective assistance of counsel and (2) the State committed a Brady violation. Concluding that defendant received effective assistance of counsel and did not demonstrate a Brady violation, we affirm the trial court's judgment. |
Claiborne | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Christine Bilyeu vs. Bobby Bilyeu
|
Cumberland | Court of Appeals | |
Michael Couillard vs. Martha Couillard
|
Carter | Court of Appeals | |
Michael Couillard vs. Martha Couillard
|
Carter | Court of Appeals | |
Emily Lewis vs. Life Care Centers of America
|
Hamilton | Court of Appeals | |
Roy Gray vs. Nancy Gray
|
Knox | Court of Appeals | |
Jan W. Gamble v. Alex Grady Gamble, Iii
|
Hamilton | Court of Appeals | |
Kathy Jean Berry v. Sara Lee Corporation d/b/a Jimmy
|
Dyer | Workers Compensation Panel | |
State of Tennessee v. Tracy T. Bostic
The Williamson County Grand Jury returned separate, one-count presentments against the defendant, Tracy T. Bostic, charging him with felony sale or delivery of a controlled substance, in violation of Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-17-417, and with felony sale or delivery of a counterfeit controlled substance, in violation of Code section 39-17-423. The defendant was tried and convicted on the controlled substance charge, and the trial court imposed an incarcerative sentence of nine years as a Range II, multiple offender and assessed a $25,000 fine. The defendant elected to forego a trial on the counterfeit controlled substance charge, and he entered a “blind” guilty plea to that offense, for which he received a three-year incarcerative sentence as a Range II, multiple offender, which was ordered to be served consecutively to the nine-year sentence. On appeal, the defendant contests the sufficiency of the evidence upon which his controlled substance conviction rests, and he complains about the length and manner of service of his combined sentences and about the $25,000 fine. Based upon our review of the video record in this case and our consideration of the briefs of the parties and applicable law, we affirm the defendant’s convictions and the incarcerative portion of his sentences, but we modify the $25,000 fine imposed to $15,000. |
Williamson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Elaine Wynn vs. Joseph Hames
|
Benton | Court of Appeals | |
E2001-02926-COA-R3-CV
|
Blount | Court of Appeals | |
John Sicard vs. Leon Williams, Inc.
|
Blount | Court of Appeals | |
In Re: Mackenzie J. Marlowe, Gregory Marlowe v. Stacy
|
Unicoi | Court of Appeals | |
In Re: Madelanie Redman, Ray & Martha Bowen v. Nathan Redman
|
Hawkins | Court of Appeals | |
In Re: Madelanie Redman, Ray & Martha Bowen v. Nathan Redman
|
Hawkins | Court of Appeals | |
April Grant Ingle vs. Robert Wayne Ingle
|
Hamilton | Court of Appeals | |
Durnelco, Inc. vs. Double James
|
Hamilton | Court of Appeals | |
William J. Vincent v. Reid Troutman, Executor, Et Al.
|
Campbell | Court of Appeals | |
Herschel Edwin Luna v. Gaf Fiberglass Corporation,
|
Davidson | Workers Compensation Panel | |
John Marshall v. Sverdrup Technologies, Inc.
|
Marshall | Workers Compensation Panel | |
Donald R. Moore v. L and D Transportation
|
Moore | Workers Compensation Panel | |
State of Tennessee v. William David Marks
The defendant brings this interlocutory appeal in which he challenges the prosecutor's denial of pretrial diversion for simple assault and the trial court's denial of his certiorari petition. We conclude the prosecutor properly considered the need for deterrence for domestic violence, the defendant's lack of remorse and failure to take responsibility for his actions, and the seriousness of the offense and its impact upon the victim. However, we conclude the prosecutor wrongfully considered certain factors relating to domestic violence cases that have no application to the circumstances of this case, and wrongfully considered the defendant's depression for which he takes prescription medication. Accordingly, we reverse the order of the trial court and remand this matter to the district attorney general for further consideration in accordance with this opinion. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Floyd Campbell v. State of Tennessee
Petitioner, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, appeals the trial court's denial of post-conviction relief. Petitioner claims counsel failed to adequately investigate evidence and properly file a motion for new trial and an amended motion for new trial. We conclude counsel was not ineffective and affirm the post-conviction court's judgment. |
Cannon | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Robert L. Freeman v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner originally pled guilty pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement to one count of aggravated assault for an agreed eight-year sentence as a Range II multiple offender. He timely sought post-conviction relief, which was denied by the post-conviction court. In this appeal, the petitioner contends his trial counsel was ineffective, and his guilty plea was involuntary. We affirm. |
Sumner | Court of Criminal Appeals |