State of Tennessee v. Donald Keith Watts a/k/a "Duck"
M2014-02540-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge George Sexton

The defendant, Donald Keith Watts, a/k/a “Duck,” was convicted of rape and sentenced to eight years at 100%.  On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion for mistrial because of an allegedly improper argument by the State and that the evidence is insufficient to sustain the verdict.  Following our review, we affirm the judgment of of the trial court.

Marcus Anthony Pearson v. State of Tennessee
M2015-01159-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert L. Holloway
Trial Court Judge: Judge Monte Watkins

Marcus Anthony Pearson (“the Petitioner”) filed a petition for post-conviction relief alleging several claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.  After a hearing, the post-conviction court denied relief.  On appeal, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

Karla J. Dennis, et al. v. Donelson Corporate Centre I, LP, et al.
M2015-01878-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Kenny Armstrong
Trial Court Judge: Judge Thomas W. Brothers

This is a negligence case. Appellee, an elevator maintenance company, contracted with building owner to provide maintenance service for the building’s elevators. Plaintiff was injured when one of the elevators allegedly did not level properly, causing her to fall as she was exiting the elevator. Plaintiff and her husband brought suit against the building’s owner, the building’s management company, and Appellee. Appellee filed a motion for summary judgment, which the trial court granted. Appellants appeal.
 

State of Tennessee v. James Allen Perry
E2015-01227-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Lisa D. Rice

The Defendant, James Allen Perry, pled guilty to fifty-nine counts of especially aggravated sexual exploitation of a minor, a Class B felony; three counts of statutory rape by an authority figure, a Class C felony; and one count of sexual exploitation of a minor, a Class D felony. See Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 39-13-532, -17-1003, -17-1005. The trial court imposed a total effective sentence of 106 years. In this appeal as of right, the Defendant contends that the trial court erred in imposing partially consecutive sentences. Following our review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Amy Denise Franklin
E2015-01619-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert L. Holloway, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Rex Henry Ogle

Amy Denise Franklin’s (“the Defendant”) probation officer filed an affidavit alleging that she had violated five rules of probation and had absconded. Following a hearing, the trial court revoked her probation and ordered her to serve the balance of her sentence in confinement. On appeal, the Defendant argues that the trial court abused its discretion by ordering her to serve her sentence in confinement without considering alternatives to incarceration. After a review of the record and applicable law, we conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Doris A. Whaley v. State of Tennessee
E2014-02378-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Judge Robert E. Cupp

The Petitioner, Doris A. Whaley, appeals the Washington County Criminal Court's denial of her petition for post-conviction relief from her conviction of first degree premeditated murder and resulting life sentence. On appeal, the Petitioner contends that she received the ineffective assistance of counsel because trial counsel failed to present medical evidence that would have shown she was physically incapable of killing the victim. Based upon the oral arguments, the record, and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

State of Tennessee v. Paul Clifford Moore, Jr.
E2015-00585-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Camille R. McMullen
Trial Court Judge: Judge Steven W. Sword

A Knox County jury convicted the Defendant-Appellant, Paul Clifford Moore, Jr., of three counts of second degree murder. See T.C.A. § 39-13-210(a)(1). The trial court imposed three fifteen-year sentences and ordered two of the three sentences served consecutively for an effective sentence of thirty years in confinement. On appeal, Moore argues (1) the trial court erred in instructing the jury that state of passion produced by adequate provocation is an essential element of the offense of voluntary manslaughter that must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt; (2) the trial court erred in instructing the jury that it must determine whether the State had proven the element of state of passion beyond a reasonable doubt; (3) the sequential jury instructions prevented the jury from ever returning a verdict of voluntary manslaughter in his case; (4) the trial court abused its discretion in admitting eyewitness testimony that Moore threatened to kill victim Amber Snellings; (5) the evidence is insufficient to sustain his convictions; (6) the trial court abused its discretion in imposing partially consecutive sentences; and (7) the cumulative effect of these errors violated his due process rights. Upon review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Jimmie D. Gulley d/b/a Kleen-Way Disposal v. Robertson County Planning & Zoning Commission
M2015-00734-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Richard H. Dinkins
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Laurence M. McMillan, Jr.

This is a zoning dispute arising out of a trash-collection business being operated in an agricultural-residential zone. The county planning and zoning commission determined that the business did not comply with existing zoning. The business owner sought review before the board of zoning appeals and, when the board affirmed the commission’s decision, filed a petition for certiorari review in chancery court, which held that the board’s action was not arbitrary and was supported by material evidence. We affirm the judgment of the chancery court.

In re Estate of Lois Culp
M2015-01421-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Arnold B. Goldin
Trial Court Judge: Judge Stella L. Hargrove

This case involves the distribution of assets in a testamentary trust. The decedent’s will provided for her real property to be left in a trust established for the benefit of her children and grandchildren. After the will was admitted to probate, the trustee filed a petition seeking judicial authorization to sell the property to avoid reoccurring expenses and prevent waste. One of the beneficiaries submitted a response in which he asserted that he and all of the other beneficiaries opposed selling the property. Following a hearing, the trial court entered an order in which it held that the will granted the trustee unrestricted authority to sell the property without judicial authorization if, in her best judgment, doing so would be in the beneficiaries’ best interest. The beneficiary appealed. We affirm.  

Mark A. Grant v. Kathy H. Grant
M2014-01835-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Neal McBrayer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Ross H. Hicks

After a long-term marriage, the wife obtained a divorce based on the husband’s inappropriate marital conduct. The trial court determined the value of the marital property, divided the marital estate, and awarded the wife both alimony in futuro and alimony in solido. The husband appealed, arguing the court erred in valuing his ownership interests in three general partnerships, in dividing the marital estate, and in awarding the wife alimony. After reviewing the extensive record in this case, we affirm the trial court’s decision.

Mark A. Grant v. Kathy H. Grant
M2014-01835-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Neal McBrayer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Ross H. Hicks

After a long-term marriage, the wife obtained a divorce based on the husband’s inappropriate marital conduct. The trial court determined the value of the marital property, divided the marital estate, and awarded the wife both alimony in futuro and alimony in solido. The husband appealed, arguing the court erred in valuing his ownership interests in three general partnerships, in dividing the marital estate, and in awarding the wife alimony. After reviewing the extensive record in this case, we affirm the trial court’s decision.

Charles Benson et al v. Knox County et al.
E2015-01357-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge John W. McClarty
Trial Court Judge: Judge William T. Ailor

This appeal arises from a zoning and land use dispute. The defendants applied to rezone most of the property at issue from Agricultural to Planned-Residential and sought approval of a development plan for a multi-dwelling project consisting of 312 apartment units. They also requested a Use-Permitted-on-Review approval for a marina on a portion of the property that would remain zoned as Agricultural. At issue before us are three separate actions taken by Knox County legislative and administrative bodies in relation to the requests, specifically: (A) the County Commission’s rezoning of the property from Agricultural to Planned-Residential at 1to 5 dwelling units per acre; (B) the Board of Zoning Appeals’ approval of the development plan for 312 apartment units; and (C) the Board of Zoning Appeals’ denial of the marina proposal. The trial court upheld the actions. We affirm.

State of Tennessee v. Stevie Michael Irwin, Jr.
E2015-01448-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Timothy L. Easter
Trial Court Judge: Judge Jon Kerry Blackwood

Defendant, Stevie Michael Irwin, Jr., was found guilty of two counts of rape of a child, two counts of attempted rape of a child, one count of aggravated sexual battery, and one count of incest. On appeal, Defendant challenges the failure of the State to properly elect offenses; the sufficiency of the evidence for the rape and attempted rape convictions; dual convictions for rape of a child in Counts One and Three as violating his right to due process; and his sentence as excessive. After a review of the record, and in light of the recent supreme court holding in State v. Qualls, 428 S.W.3d 1 (2016), we affirm the convictions and sentences.

Carol Mooney, et al. v. Genuine Parts Company d/b/a National Automotive Association, Inc. ("NAPA"), et al.
W2015-02080-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Brandon O. Gibson
Trial Court Judge: Judge Clayburn Peeples

This appeal arises out of a premises liability case involving a plaintiff who fell while exiting an auto parts store. The trial court granted the defendants' motion for summary judgment. We affirm and remand for further proceedings

In re Jimmy B., Jr.
E2015-02070-COA-R3-PT
Authoring Judge: Judge Arnold B. Goldin
Trial Court Judge: Judge Jeffrey D. Rader

This is a termination of parental rights case. In May 2015, the Tennessee Department of Children’s Services (“DCS”) filed a petition in Sevier County Juvenile Court seeking to terminate the parental rights of the child’s father. The juvenile court found by clear and convincing evidence that termination was appropriate on the following grounds: (1) abandonment by willful failure to support; (2) severe child abuse; and (3) persistence of conditions. The juvenile court also found by clear and convincing evidence that termination was in the child’s best interests. Father appealed. We hold that the record does not contain clear and convincing evidence to support termination on the grounds of abandonment for willful failure to support and persistence of conditions, and we reverse as to those grounds for termination.

State of Tennessee v. Demarcus Keyon Cole
W2015-01901-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge Roy B. Morgan, Jr.

The petitioner, Demarcus Keyon Cole, acting pro se, appeals the post-conviction court's denial of his petition for post-conviction relief, arguing he received ineffective assistance of counsel. After review, we affirm the denial of the petition.

Marianne Greer v. Philip Ernest Cobble
E2015-01378-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Kenny Armstrong
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Clarence E. Pridemore, Jr.

This is the second appeal of this case involving the distribution of a marital estate. Appellant appeals the order denying him relief pursuant to Rule 60.02 of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure (Rule 60.02). Because the appellate record contains no transcript or statement of the evidence conveying an accurate and complete account of what transpired as required by the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure, we conclude that the findings made by the trial court were based upon sufficient evidence. Affirmed and remanded.

In re Ian B., et al
M2015-01079-COA-R3-PT
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Neal McBrayer
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Howard W. Wilson

Father appeals the termination of his parental rights on the grounds of abandonment. The lack of a transcript prevents us from determining whether sufficient evidence supported the termination and denies Father proper appellate consideration of his claims. We therefore vacate the judgment of the trial court and remand the case for proceedings consistent with this opinion. 

Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Richard H. Roberts, Commissioner, Department of Revenue
M2014-02567-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Neal McBrayer
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Ellen H. Lyle

This case involves a taxpayer’s claim to a sales tax deduction under Tennessee Code Annotated § 67-6-507(e) for bad debts associated with private label and co-branded credit card programs. After an audit, the Tennessee Department of Revenue disallowed taxpayer’s bad debt deductions and assessed additional tax. Taxpayer paid the assessment and filed a claim for a refund, which was denied. Taxpayer sued the Commissioner of the Department of Revenue (“Commissioner”) in chancery court, seeking a declaration that it was entitled to the bad debt sales tax deduction and a monetary judgment for the additional assessed tax. On cross-motions for summary judgment, the chancery court granted the Commissioner’s motion, holding the taxpayer was not entitled to claim the deduction. We affirm.
 

State of Tennessee v. Charles Edward Phillips, III
W2015-01731-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge C. Creed McGinley

The defendant, Charles Edward Phillips, III, was convicted by a Benton County Circuit Court jury of aggravated kidnapping, a Class B felony; aggravated assault, a Class C felony; interference with emergency communications, a Class A misdemeanor; and driving while license suspended, revoked, or cancelled, a Class B misdemeanor. The trial court reduced the aggravated assault conviction to simple assault, a Class A misdemeanor, and sentenced the defendant as a Range I offender to an effective term of twelve years at 100% in the Department of Correction. The sole issue the defendant raises on appeal is whether the trial court imposed an excessive sentence. Following our review, we affirm the sentencing imposed by the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. David Anderson Hatcher
E2015-01734-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge James Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge David R. Duggan,

The defendant, David Anderson Hatcher, appeals the revocation of the probationary sentence imposed for his Blount County Circuit Court conviction of aggravated burglary. Discerning no error, we affirm.

Aaron T. James v. Shawn Phillips, Warden
E2015-02110-CCA-R3-HC
Authoring Judge: Judge D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge E. Eugene Eblen

The Petitioner, Aaron T. James, appeals as of right from the Morgan County Criminal Court’s summary dismissal of his petition for writ of habeas corpus. On appeal, the Petitioner contends that his judgment is void because his guilty plea to second degree murder was unknowing and involuntary. Discerning no error, we affirm the judgment of the habeas corpus court.

State of Tennessee v. Joseph B. Thompson
E2015-01963-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge R. Jerry Beck

The Appellant, Joseph B. Thompson, appeals as of right from the Sullivan County Criminal Court's summary denial of his Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 36.1 motion to correct an illegal sentence. The Appellant contends that his motion stated a colorable claim for relief and that, therefore, the trial court erred in summarily denying the motion. Discerning no error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Marcus Belton, et al. v. City of Memphis, et al.
W2015-01785-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge J. Steven Stafford
Trial Court Judge: Judge Robert Samual Weiss

Plaintiff/Appellant appeals from the dismissal of his civil rights claims based upon the expiration of the one-year statute of limitations contained in Tennessee Code Annotated Section 28-3-104. Because Appellant's complaint, taken as true at the motion to dismiss stage, sufficiently alleges post-contract formation conduct on the part of the Defendants/Appellees, we conclude that the four-year federal catchall statute of limitations under 28 U.S.C. § 1658 applies to Appellant's claims in this case. Accordingly, we reverse the trial court's dismissal of Appellant's civil rights claims and remand for further proceedings. Because Appellant did not designate the dismissal of his state law contract claims as issues on appeal, however, we affirm the dismissal of those claims.

State of Tennessee v. Kenneth McCormick
M2013-02189-SC-R11-CD
Authoring Judge: Justice Cornelia A. Clark
Trial Court Judge: Judge David A. Patterson

We granted this appeal to reconsider our decision in State v. Moats, 403 S.W.3d 170 (Tenn. 2013), which held that the community caretaking doctrine is not an exception to the federal and state constitutional warrant requirements. Having concluded that Moats was wrongly decided, we overrule Moats and hold that the community caretaking doctrine is analytically distinct from consensual police-citizen encounters and is instead an exception to the state and federal constitutional warrant requirements which may be invoked to validate as reasonable a warrantless seizure of an automobile. To establish that the community caretaking exception applies, the State must show that (1) the officer possessed specific and articulable facts, which, viewed objectively and in the totality of the circumstances, reasonably warranted a conclusion that a community caretaking action was needed; and (2) the officer’s behavior and the scope of the intrusion were reasonably restrained and tailored to the community caretaking need. We conclude, based on the proof in the record on appeal, that the community caretaking exception applies in this case. Accordingly, the judgments of the trial court and Court of Criminal Appeals declining to grant the defendant’s motion to suppress are affirmed on the separate grounds stated herein.