State of Tennessee v. Luther Ray Mabe, Jr.
I fully concur with my respected colleagues’ reasoning and judgment as it relates to |
Hawkins | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Danny Lynn Collier
The Defendant, Danny Lynn Collier, appeals the Sullivan County Criminal Court’s |
Sullivan | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
In Re Andrew L.
This is a termination of parental rights case. Mother appeals the trial court’s order |
Court of Appeals | ||
State of Tennessee v. Shanynthia Gardner
Following a bench trial, Shanynthia Gardner (“Defendant”) was convicted of four counts |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Jamauri Ransom v. State of Tennessee
A Madison County jury convicted the Petitioner, Jamauri Ransom, of aggravated robbery |
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Roosevelt Morris v. Jason Clendenion, Warden
Petitioner, Roosevelt Morris, appeals from the Hickman County Circuit Court’s summary dismissal of his petition for writ of habeas corpus. Petitioner alleges he is entitled to relief because his sentence is unconstitutional under Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 (2004), he did not receive timely pretrial notice of the State’s notice of intent to seek enhanced punishment, and because the habeas corpus court did not give him sufficient time to file a written reply to the State’s response to the habeas corpus petition. After review, we affirm the judgment of the habeas corpus court. |
Hickman | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Donald Wayne Haynes
The Defendant, Donald Haynes, pleaded guilty to two counts of attempted aggravated sexual battery in exchange for an effective sentence of eight years to be served on probation. At a subsequent restitution hearing, the trial court ordered the Defendant to pay $42,000 in restitution to the victim in monthly installments of $500. On appeal, the Defendant contends that there was insufficient evidence of pecuniary loss to support an order of restitution. After review, we reverse and remand the case for the trial court to determine the victim’s credibility, the victim’s pecuniary loss, if any, and to make adequate findings of fact, if any, to support the imposition of restitution based upon sufficient credible evidence of pecuniary loss. |
Wilson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Erroll Sherrod v. Smith & Nephew, Inc.
This products-liability case is dismissed with prejudice on the parties’ joint stipulation of |
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. William Timothy Kirk
Defendant, William Timothy Kirk, pleaded guilty to driving under the influence (DUI), first offense. The trial court sentenced Defendant to a term of eleven months, twenty-nine days in confinement, to be served at seventy-five percent. The trial court ordered the DUI sentence to be served consecutively to the life sentence for which Defendant was on parole at the time of the offense. On appeal, Defendant argues the trial court abused its discretion by imposing consecutive sentences. After review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Rutherford | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Jessica Garvin v. Mariah Shelton
The plaintiff filed a complaint for a restraining order against the defendant, the wife of the |
Court of Appeals | ||
State of Tennessee v. Darren Marion Little
The Defendant, Darren Marion Little, pleaded guilty to two counts of violating the Sex Offender Registry and one count of possessing a prohibited weapon. The trial court sentenced the Defendant as a Range III offender to an effective sentence of ten years of incarceration. On appeal, the Defendant contends, and the State concedes, that the trial court erred when it classified him as a Range III offender. After review, we agree with the parties. We reverse the trial court’s judgment and remand the case for resentencing. |
Lincoln | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Theodore Devon Wells
A Lincoln County jury convicted the Defendant, Theodore Devon Wells, of sale of a Schedule II narcotic, cocaine, and delivery of a Schedule II narcotic, cocaine. The trial court sentenced the Defendant as a Range III offender to twenty-eight years. On appeal, the Defendant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions and that the trial court erroneously admitted certain items of evidence. He further contends that his Sixth Amendment right of confrontation was violated. Finally, he contends that the trial court erred when it sentenced him. After review, we affirm the trial court’s judgments. |
Lincoln | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
In Re Estate of Dariel Blackledge Washington
Decedent’s siblings filed a document they alleged to be decedent’s last will and testament. Decedent’s husband, the personal representative of her estate, moved to declare the alleged will invalid for lack of an effective signature. The trial court concluded that the will was ineffective due to the lack of decedent’s signature, and declined to admit it to probate. Discerning no error, we affirm. |
Davidson | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Chris M. Jones
Pro-se petitioner, Chris M. Jones, appeals the Shelby County Criminal Court’s denial of |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
In Re Charlee N. et al.
This is a termination of parental rights case. The trial court terminated the parental rights of the parents to two children, finding that there was clear and convincing evidence as to both parents regarding the ground of severe child abuse and that termination of the parents’ rights was in the children’s best interest. Having carefully reviewed the record, we affirm. |
Overton | Court of Appeals | |
In Re Serenity S. et al.
Heather B. 1 (“Mother”) and John S., III (“Father”) are the biological parents of Serenity S. Mother and Raymond R. are the biological parents of Harmony R., Mellody O., and Angel O. Tina S. (“Grandmother”) and John S., Jr. (“Grandfather” or, together with Grandmother, “Petitioners”) petitioned the Chancery Court for Giles County (the “trial court”) for termination of Mother’s and Raymond R.’s parental rights in April of 2021 and for adoption of the children. Father voluntarily surrendered his parental rights as to Serenity S. As for the grounds for termination, Petitioners alleged: substantial noncompliance with the permanency plan, persistence of conditions, and failure to manifest an ability and willingness to personally assume legal and physical custody of the children. Following a bench trial, the trial court concluded that Petitioners proved all three statutory grounds for termination and that termination was in the Children’s best interests. Mother appeals to this Court. Having reviewed the record, we conclude that the trial court’s order must be vacated and remanded. Because Petitioners proved no statutory grounds for termination by clear and convincing evidence, we need not consider whether termination of Mother’s parental rights is in the Children’s best interests. |
Giles | Court of Appeals | |
Mazie F. White v. Thomas Gray Miller
The trial court found Father to be willfully underemployed and imputed income to him for calculation of child support. Mother appeals the juvenile court’s determination, arguing the trial court erred as to the amount of income imputed to Father for the purposes of setting child support and also as to its determination of the amount of retroactive support. We affirm the trial court’s income imputation. However, we conclude the trial court erred in its calculation of retroactive support owed by Father. Therefore, this Court affirms the judgment of the trial court in part and reverses in part. |
Williamson | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Thakelyn J. Tate
The Defendant, Thakelyn J. Tate, was convicted by a jury of conspiracy to possess more |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Durrell James a/k/a James Durrell
Defendant, Durrell James a/k/a/ James Durrell, was convicted by a Shelby County Jury of |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Jermaine R. Carpenter
The Defendant, Jermaine R. Carpenter, appeals the trial court’s summary dismissal of his |
Sullivan | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Edgar Bailey, Jr. v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, Edgar Bailey Jr., appeals from the Hamilton County Criminal Court’s |
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
James William Mabe v. State of Tennessee
Petitioner, James William Mabe, appeals the denial of his post-conviction petition, arguing that the post-conviction court erred in denying his petition alleging ineffective assistance of counsel at trial. Following our review of the entire record and the briefs of the parties, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Warren | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Cededrick Ivory a/k/a Cederick Ivory
The Defendant-Appellant, Cededrick Ivory, was indicted by a Shelby County Grand Jury |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
In Re Michael C. Et Al.
The appellant challenges the trial court’s termination of her parental rights. The trial court |
Court of Appeals | ||
In Re Zoey L.
In a private petition for terminationof parental rights, the petitioner alleged multiple grounds for termination: (1) abandonment for failure to visit; (2) abandonment for failure to support; and (3) failure to manifest an ability and willingness to assume custody. The trial court found the Father’s parental rights should be terminatedbased upon thesethree groundsand that termination was in the child’s best interest. We affirm the trial court’s ruling as to the termination grounds of abandonment by failure to visit and failure to support. Because the trial court did not make findings of factconcluding that placing legal and physical custody withFather would pose a risk of substantial harm tothe physical or psychological welfare of the child, we must vacatethe trial court’s ruling as to the failure to manifest an ability and willingness to assume custody ground. We affirm the trial court’s conclusionthat termination of Father’s parental rights is in the best interest of the child. |
Court of Appeals |