Bryan Hanley v. State of Tennessee
The petitioner, Bryan Hanley, was convicted by a jury in the Hickman County Circuit Court of one count of first degree murder and one count of theft of property over $1000. The petitioner was sentenced to life imprisonment in the Tennessee Department of Correction for the murder conviction and to three years incarceration for the theft conviction, with the sentences to run concurrently. Subsequently, the petitioner filed a post-conviction petition alleging the ineffective assistance of counsel. The post-conviction court denied the petition and the petitioner appeals. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Hickman | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Wayne Miles v. Warden, Fred J. Raney
Petitioner,Wayne Miles, appeals as of right from the trial court's dismissal of his petition for habeas corpus relief. Petitioner argues that he is being illegally detained because his convictions are void. After a thorough review of the record, we affirm the trial court's dismissal of the Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus. |
Lake | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Martin Walker vs. State
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Alfred Bibbins, a/k/a Ed Owens vs. T.R. Gunn
|
Hamilton | Court of Appeals | |
Services v. D.G.S.L.
|
Knox | Court of Appeals | |
Ray White v. Regions Financial Corp.
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
Thelia Barrett v. White House Utility District
|
Wilson | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Burita A. Winebarger
The Defendant, Burita A. Winebarger, was charged in an arrest warrant with the offense of theft of property less than $500.00 in value. She pled guilty to the offense in the General Sessions Court of Sullivan County. The General Sessions Court sentenced her to serve eleven months and twenty-nine days, with all but thirty days suspended. Defendant filed a timely appeal to the Criminal Court of Sullivan County. On the date that the case was set for "announcement" in criminal court, Defendant was approximately one hour late in arriving at court. The criminal court dismissed the appeal for "failure to prosecute" and remanded the case to the General Sessions Court of Sullivan County for "execution of the sentence." The Defendant filed a timely appeal to this court. After a review of the record, and the applicable law, we reverse the judgment of the criminal court and remand for a sentencing hearing de novo. |
Sullivan | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
In Re Estate of Fannie Barnhill
|
Fayette | Supreme Court | |
State v. Timothy McKinney
|
Shelby | Supreme Court | |
State v. Timothy McKinney
|
Shelby | Supreme Court | |
Terry Lynn, et al. v. City of Jackson
|
Madison | Supreme Court | |
Mary Johnson, et al. v. LeBonheur Children's Medical Center, et al.
|
Shelby | Supreme Court | |
Billy Joe Childress v. Natasha Barnes Currie, et al.
|
Lauderdale | Supreme Court | |
Ralph Alley, et al vs. Quebecor World Kingsportet al
|
Hawkins | Court of Appeals | |
James O'Neal Vineyard, et ux. v. Walker Betty, et ux.
|
Dickson | Court of Appeals | |
Connie Givens v. Ed Mullikin, Admin. ad litem for Larry McElwaney
|
Shelby | Supreme Court | |
Trau-Med of America, Inc. d/b/a Bellevue Clinic v. AllState Ins. Co.
|
Shelby | Supreme Court | |
Planters Gin v. Federal Compress & Warehouse
|
Shelby | Supreme Court | |
State of Tennessee v. Janice Carol Biskner
Defendant was convicted of driving under the influence ("DUI"), fourth or subsequent offense, driving while license revoked, and child endangerment. In this appeal, Defendant challenges all convictions on the ground that the trial court's refusal to bifurcate the trial proceedings violated her right to a fair trial. Defendant also argues that recently amended Tennessee Code Annotated section 55-10-403(a)(1) is unconstitutional and that her sentence is excessive. After a review of the record and applicable law, we reverse Defendant's convictions and remand this case for a new trial. |
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
12-98-044-CC
|
Dickson | Court of Appeals | |
In Re: D.M.S., G.H.S., and T.M.S.
|
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Kenneth Lee Pipkin
A Stewart County grand jury indicted the defendant on one count of first degree murder involving Marilyn June Adkins' death. Following a jury trial, he stood convicted of second degree murder. For this offense he received fifteen years as a Range I, standard offender. Thereafter the defendant elected not to file a new trial motion and waived his right to bring a direct appeal. Nevertheless, he later filed a post-conviction petition alleging five grounds for relief. Finding that trial counsel had provided ineffective assistance in advising the defendant regarding waiving direct appeal, this Court allowed him to file a delayed appeal. See Kenneth Lee Pipkin v. State, No. 01C01-9608-CC-00328, 1997 WL 749441 at *1, 8-9 (Tenn. Crim. App. at Nashville, Dec. 4, 1997.) As no new trial motion had been brought, the defendant was also allowed to file such motion. See id. at *9. Through this motion the defendant unsuccessfully alleged that there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction. He now brings the same issue before this Court. However, after reviewing the matter, we find it to lack merit and affirm the action of the lower court. |
Stewart | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Nordell Buggs
Defendant contends that the evidence was insufficient to support the convictions of attempted burglary and possession of burglary tools. We affirm the judgments from the trial court. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Rita Davis
The Appellant, Rita Davis, pled guilty to one count of failure to appear, a class E felony, and was sentenced as a career offender to six years confinement. No direct appeal of her sentence was taken. Davis then filed a petition for post-conviction relief, requesting (1) a delayed direct appeal of her sentence; and (2) that her conviction be vacated upon grounds: (a) that her guilty plea was involuntarily entered based upon ineffective assistance of counsel; and (b) that her conviction was obtained in violation of "constitutional due process rights." After review, we find that the post-conviction court's consolidation of issue (1), granting the direct appeal of her sentence, and issue (2), the collateral review of Davis' challenge to her conviction through post-conviction process, conflicts with our previous holding in Gibson v. State, 7 S.W.3d 47 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1998). Thus, consistent with Gibson, we reverse and remand issue (2) with instructions that Davis' collateral attack of her conviction be dismissed without prejudice. With respect to issue (1), we grant review of Davis' six-year sentence. After review, we find this issue is without merit and affirm her sentence as imposed. |
Marshall | Court of Criminal Appeals |