State of Tennessee v. Edwin Milton Socall
M1999-02727-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer

The appellant, Edwin Milton Socall, was indicted by a Montgomery County Grand Jury for driving under the influence (DUI), reckless driving, violation of the implied consent law, and driving on a revoked license (DORL). Following a bench trial, Socall was found guilty of first offense DUI and second offense DORL. He was sentenced to eleven months, twenty-nine days, with all but thirty days suspended, for DUI, and eleven months, twenty-nine days, all suspended, for DORL, second offense. At the bench trial, Socall was represented by retained counsel; however, no court reporter was employed to transcribe the proceedings.

Following his conviction, Socall requested that he be found indigent for purposes of appeal and requested appointed appellate counsel. The trial court granted his request and appointed the public defender's office. Because the proceedings below were not transcribed, a statement of evidence pursuant to Tenn. R. App. P. 24(c) was prepared. On appeal, three issues are presented for our review: (1) Whether "the failure to preserve evidence through the use of a court reporter or tape recording" deprived Socall of an effective appeal; (2) whether the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions of first offense DUI and second offense DORL; and (3) whether the trial court erred by ordering Socall to serve thirty days in confinement. After review, we find issue (1) is without merit and issue (3) is waived. Moreover, we hold the evidence is sufficient to support Socall's convictions for DUI and DORL, second offense. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

State of Tennessee v. Anthony Carpenter
W2000-01229-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Chris B. Craft

The defendant, Anthony Carpenter, was convicted by a jury of second degree murder. In this appeal as of right, he asserts that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction and that the trial court erred by sentencing him to twenty-three years incarceration. We find no error; thus, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Michael Shane Hyder v. Allen Bargery, Warden
W2000-01533-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Special Judge Cornelia A. Clark
Trial Court Judge: Judge Jon Kerry Blackwood

The state has appealed from the judgment of the Circuit Court of Hardeman County granting the petitioner habeas corpus relief and finding that his two consecutive three-year sentences had expired. The state asserts that the sentences have not expired and that the petitioner is not entitled to be released from prison. Because the state has not filed an adequate record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Richard Wools
W2000-01979-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Judge Mark Agee

Defendant appeals his conviction at a bench trial for the offense of cruelty to animals. The trial court sentenced him to eleven months and twenty-nine days with all but ten days suspended. He raises the following issues for our review: (1) whether the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction; (2) whether the trial court erroneously admitted evidence outside the facts alleged in the charging instrument; (3) whether the trial court erroneously allowed three witnesses to give opinion testimony; and (4) whether the trial court erred in failing to suspend the entire sentence. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Jacqueline Hurt
W2000-02193-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Special Judge Cornelia A. Clark
Trial Court Judge: Judge W. Otis Higgs, Jr.

Pursuant to a plea agreement, the appellant, Jacqueline Hurt, entered open guilty pleas to two counts of attempted first degree murder, one count of especially aggravated robbery, and one count of especially aggravated kidnaping, all Class A felonies. She received an effective sentence of seventy-five years. The appellant contends that the trial court imposed an excessive sentence because it erred in applying one enhancement factor and because it imposed consecutive sentences. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Timothy Tillery
E2000-01996-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.

The Defendant, Timothy Tillery, appeals as of right from the revocation of his probation. On appeal, he argues (1) that the trial court erred by refusing to dismiss the probation revocation proceeding because his right to a speedy trial was violated and (2) that the trial court erred by revoking his probation. We find no error; thus, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Timothy Tillery - Concurring
E2000-01996-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Judge D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.

I concur in the results reached in the majority opinion, but I disagree with its view of when the defendant’s speedy trial right began and with its view of the due process analysis, which indicates that the burden of proving the state’s improper intent is on the defendant. On the other hand, I do not believe that the record justifies our awarding the defendant the relief he seeks.

Joe Grant vs. Service Transport
W2000-02688-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Rita L. Stotts
This appeal arises from a negligence claim filed by the appellee against the appellant in the Circuit Court of Shelby County. The appellant filed a motion for summary judgment or, in the alternative, to dismiss for failure to state a claim. The trial court denied the appellant's motion. The appellant filed a motion for permission to file an interlocutory appeal. The appellee filed an order of voluntary dismissal before the appellant's motion for permission to file an interlocutory appeal could be heard. The appellant appeals, arguing that the order of voluntary dismissal deprived it of the right to seek appellate review of the trial court's denial of its motion for summary judgment or, in the alternative, to dismiss for failure to state a claim. For the reasons stated herein, we affirm the trial court's decision.

Randy Dale Story v. Chastity Dawn (Batts) Shelton
01-95-004-M
Trial Court Judge: A. Andrew Jackson

State of Tennessee v. Doyle W. Pugh
E2000-02488-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Lillie Ann Sells

Pursuant to a plea agreement, the defendant pled guilty to two misdemeanor counts of fraudulent use of a credit card and was placed on judicial diversion. Thereafter, a warrant was filed in which the defendant's probation officer alleged that the defendant failed to report as directed and failed to pay fines and court costs in a timely manner. After a hearing on the warrant, the trial court revoked the defendant's judicial diversion and entered a judgment against the defendant, requiring him to serve eleven months and twenty-nine days on each count, with the sentences to run concurrently. The defendant now appeals, arguing that the trial court abused its discretion by sentencing the defendant to eleven months and twenty-nine days incarceration rather than eleven months and twenty-nine days probation. Finding no error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Henry Witt, et ux vs. Tennessee Farmers Mutual Insurance
E2001-00401-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Jerri S. Bryant
The trial court refused to grant plaintiffs relief from a judgment pursuant to Tenn. R. Civ. P. 59 or 60. Defendant has appealed. We affirm the trial court.

Clear Fork Mining Company vs. Willie Marlow, et al & Willie Marlow, et al vs. Carl Kinkg, et al
E2000-01196-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Billy Joe White
In the case presently on appeal Willie Marlow, et al., seek a court determination that he is the owner of certain real estate located in Campbell County. The trial court, on motion of Jim King, found the parties had reached an agreement as to the controversy in accordance with his insistence. The trial court thereupon entered a judgment in favor of Mr. King. Mr. Marlow appeals contending enforcement of the agreement violates the Statute of Frauds and such a resolution was barred by the six-year Statute of Limitations. We affirm

State of Tennessee v. Shane Wendell Yankee
E2000-01922-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Gary R Wade
Trial Court Judge: Judge James E. Beckner

The defendant, Shane Wendell Yankee, appeals the trial court's summary dismissal of his motion to correct an illegal judgment. The issues presented for review are whether the appeal is permissible under Rule 3 of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure and, if so, whether the denial of relief was proper. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Kevin Sanders, et al vs. Lincoln County, et al
M2000-01386-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Lee Russell
This case questions the defendants' decision to remove Gill Road and Endsley Road from the county road list, thereby exempting landowners on these roads from the stock gap removal policy of the county affecting public roads. Plaintiff claims such action violates constitutional equal protection rights. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendants. The plaintiffs assert that the jury's verdict is contrary to the weight of the evidence and that the trial court erred by submitting an incomplete and misleading verdict form to the jury. The trial court approved the jury verdict for the defendant and we affirm.

Raymond G. Prince, P.C. vs. Manfred Polk
M2000-01859-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Barbara N. Haynes
This matter originated from a default judgment granted in general sessions court against Appellant/Defendant, Manfred Polk, for payment of attorney's fees. Appellant filed a Rule 60.02 Motion to Vacate the default judgment, which was denied; an appeal to the circuit court, which was dismissed for failure to set; followed by a Motion to Reinstate and Motion to Set, which were denied. Defendant now appeals the denial of the Motion to Reinstate and Motion to Set claiming a violation of due process and abuse of discretion on the part of the circuit court. We affirm the circuit court's dismissal of these motions.

State of Tennessee v. Paul R. Pearcy
W2000-02867-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Cornelia A. Clark
Trial Court Judge: Judge C. Creed McGinley

The defendant pled guilty to the Class E felony offense of possession of three and one-half pounds of marijuana with intent to manufacture, deliver or sell, and to the Class A misdemeanor of possession of unlawful drug paraphernalia. He now appeals his two-year sentence to the Department of Correction. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

State of Tennessee v. Harry M. Nimmons
E2000-02396-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Richard R. Baumgartner

The state appeals from the Knox County Criminal Court's dismissal of a three-count presentment against the defendant, Harry M. Nimmons. The trial court premised its dismissal of the presentment upon the lack of a preliminary hearing prior to return of the presentment, although the court found that the lack of a preliminary hearing was not attributable to bad faith by the state. Because there was no showing of bad faith by the state, we reverse the trial court's order and reinstate the presentment against the defendant.

State of Tennessee v. Donald Paul Presley
E2000-00592-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Judge James B. Scott, Jr.

The appellant, Donald Paul Presley, pled guilty in the Anderson County Criminal Court to voluntary manslaughter, a class C felony. Pursuant to a plea agreement, the trial court sentenced the appellant as a Range I standard offender to four years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. Moreover, following a sentencing hearing, the trial court ordered that the appellant serve his entire sentence in confinement. The appellant now appeals the trial court's denial of any form of alternative sentencing. Following a review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Rhonda Lyn Vaughan vs. Joseph Clyde Vaughan
M2000-00623-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Jeffrey S. Bivins
This is a divorce case in which alimony is in dispute. The trial court awarded alimony in futuro to the wife in the amount of $750 per month until her death or remarriage, and ordered the husband to purchase a $100,000 life insurance policy for the benefit of the wife. The trial court also ordered the husband to pay $1,500 of the wife's attorney's fees. The husband appeals, arguing that alimony in futuro was inappropriate because the wife is self-sufficient with her income as a nanny. In the alternative, the husband argues that rehabilitative alimony is more appropriate. We affirm the judgment of the trial court in all respects.

Olalee Herron McClaran vs. Don M. McClaran
M2000-01666-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Don R. Ash
Plaintiff Olalee Herron McClaran sues her son, Defendant Don M. McClaran, seeking compensatory and punitive damages for his mishandling of funds coming into his hands as her attorney in fact in connection with the sale of certain real estate. The jury awarded both compensatory and punitive damages, resulting in this appeal wherein Mr. McClaran complains of the exclusion of evidence, the trial court's directing a verdict as to two claims in his counter-complaint, the seating of a six-person, rather than a 12-person jury, and the excessiveness of the punitive damage award. We affirm.

State of Tennessee v. Antonio Bonds
W2000-01242-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge W. Fred Axley

The appellant, Antonio Bonds, was indicted by a Shelby County Grand Jury on one count of premeditated first-degree murder. On September 30, 1999, a jury found Bonds guilty of the indicted offense and he was sentenced to life imprisonment. On appeal, Bonds raises one issue for our review: Whether "the evidence of [his] identity as the culprit is sufficient to support the verdict beyond a reasonable doubt." After review, we find the evidence legally sufficient to support the verdict of first-degree murder. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Harold J. Douglas
W2000-01090-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge Joseph B. Dailey

The appellant, Harold J. Douglas, was indicted by a Shelby County Grand jury on one count of second degree murder. Following a jury trial, Douglas was convicted of voluntary manslaughter and was sentenced to fourteen years in the Department of Correction. On appeal, Douglas raises one issue for our review: Whether the evidence presented at trial was sufficient to find him guilty of voluntary manslaughter. Finding the evidence legally sufficient to support the verdict, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

State of Tennessee v. Marcus Duvalle Hurston
W2000-01721-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Judge Roy B. Morgan, Jr.

The appellant, Marcus Duvalle Hurston, was convicted by a jury in the Madison County Circuit Court of one count of aggravated assault. The trial court sentenced the appellant as a Range II multiple offender to eight years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the appellant raises the following issue for our review: whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain his conviction of aggravated assault. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Tiffany Lafonzo Betts v. State of Tennessee
W2000-02004-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Judge Joe C. Morris

The petitioner was originally convicted by a Madison County jury of second degree murder and unlawful possession of a weapon employed in committing the offense. He received an effective 20-year sentence. The petitioner subsequently sought post-conviction relief, which was denied. The petitioner appeals the denial of post-conviction relief based on ineffective assistance of counsel, alleging trial counsel failed to adequately discuss the state's plea offer prior to trial. We conclude that the post-conviction court correctly denied post-conviction relief.

State of Tennessee v. Kevin Jermaine Morris
W2000-02166-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge Roy B. Morgan, Jr.

The State sought revocation of the defendant’s probation for his allegedly failing to report to his probation officer within seventy-two hours of his release from jail, failing to provide proof of employment, failing to complete required community service work, failing to provide a DNA sample, and failing to pay probation fees. After a hearing, the trial court revoked the probation, finding that the defendant had violated four of its conditions. On appeal to this court, the defendant presents the sole issue of whether the trial court erred in revoking his probation. Based upon our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. However, we remand for entry of a corrected judgment.