Roger Dale Lewis v. State of Tennessee
M2002-02439-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Jane W. Wheatcraft

Roger Dale Lewis, the petitioner, appeals the dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief by the Sumner County Criminal Court. Through his petition, the petitioner sought to collaterally attack his aggravated arson conviction on the grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel and due process violations in the nature of suppression of exculpatory evidence and prosecutorial misconduct. After consideration of the entire record, we affirm the post-conviction courts disposition.

State of Tennessee v. Stephen Denton
E2000-02615-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge R. Steven Bebb

In August 1998, the McMinn County Grand Jury indicted the Defendant, Stephen L. Denton, M.D., for one count of rape, two counts of sexual battery, and two counts of unlawful distribution of a Schedule IV controlled substance. In November 1998, the McMinn County Grand Jury indicted the Defendant for three counts of rape, one count of attempted rape, and eight counts of sexual battery. In March 1999, the McMinn County Grand Jury indicted the Defendant for one count of rape and four counts of sexual battery. In sum, the Defendant was charged in three different indictments for twenty-two criminal offenses involving eleven different female patients. Despite repeated objections by the Defendant, the three indictments were consolidated for trial. Four of the counts were nollied before trial, two more counts were dismissed at the conclusion of the State's proof, and the final sixteen counts were considered by the jury. The jury convicted the Defendant for six counts of sexual battery, one count of sexual battery by an authority figure, and three counts of assault and acquitted the Defendant on the remaining six counts. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court imposed an effective sentence of five years of incarceration. On appeal, the Defendant contends: (1) that the trial court erred by denying his Motion for Severance; (2) that the trial court erred by denying his Motion to Suppress his statement given to law enforcement officers after his arrest; (3) that the trial court erred by allowing the State to improperly cross-examine the Defendant and his former wife; (4) that the Defendant did not exercise "supervisory power" over his patient, and, therefore, was improperly convicted for sexual battery by an authority figure; (5) that the State presented improper closing arguments that were "so inflammatory and prejudicial as to require reversal;" (6) that the Defendant's conviction for assault against an undercover law enforcement officer should be dismissed because the undercover officer consented to the actions of the Defendant; (7) that the State failed to elect the incident upon which it was relying to support one of the Defendant's sexual battery convictions; and (8) that the trial court improperly sentenced the Defendant. Finding reversible error in case number 98-538, we reverse and remand the Defendant's conviction for assault in that case. We affirm all of the other judgments of the trial court.

John M. Johnson v. David Mills, Warden
E2002-02175-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Judge E. Eugene Eblen

The Defendant, John M. Johnson, appeals from the denial of his petition for writ of habeas corpus. Finding that denial of the petition was appropriate, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Jerry Worley v. State of Tennessee
E2003-00098-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Judge Phyllis H. Miller

The Defendant, Jerry Worley, pled guilty to nine counts of selling .5 grams or more of cocaine and one count of possession with intent to sell over .5 grams of cocaine. For these offenses, the Defendant received an effective sentence of twenty years. The Defendant did not perfect an appeal of his sentence, but petitioned for post-conviction relief on the grounds that his guilty plea was not valid; was the result of ineffective assistance of counsel; and that his sentence offends constitutional due process. After an evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied relief, and this appeal followed. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Dolwin Deon Cormia v. State of Tennessee
E2003-00653-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Douglas A. Meyer

A Hamilton County jury convicted the Petitioner, Dolwin Deon Cormia, of first degree murder and abuse of a corpse, and the trial court imposed a life sentence with the possibility of parole plus a concurrent two year sentence. On direct appeal, this Court affirmed the conviction, and the Tennessee Supreme Court denied the Petitioner's application for permission to appeal. The Petitioner then sought post-conviction relief, alleging that he was denied effective assistance of counsel. Following a hearing on the post-conviction petition, the trial court dismissed the petition, and this appeal ensued. We affirm the trial court's dismissal of the petition.

State of Tennessee v. Glenn C. Summers
E2002-01996-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Gary R Wade
Trial Court Judge: Judge Phyllis H. Miller

The defendant, Glenn C. Summers, was convicted of first degree murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. In this appeal, the defendant presents two issues for review: (1) that he established the affirmative defense of insanity and (2) that the trial court erred by providing an irrelevant definition of "intentional" in its jury instructions. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Gregory A. Hedges v. State of Tennessee
E2002-02610-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge James E. Beckner

The petitioner filed a petition for writ of error coram nobis claiming a due process violation in that the State failed to disclose a plea agreement with a material witness. We conclude the issues raised by the petitioner have been previously determined and are time barred. We further conclude the facts of this case do not justify tolling of the statute of limitations. We affirm the trial court's dismissal.

Permanent General Insurance v. Howard E. Raymer
M2002-03042-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Joe C. Loser, Jr., Sp. J.
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle, Chancellor
In this appeal, the appellant questions the trial court's findings that the employee's hernias were work related and the extent of his vocational disability. The appellant further contends the trial court erred in not reducing the lump sum award to its present value. As discussed below, the panel has concluded (1) the evidence fails to preponderate against the trial court's findings of fact and (2) Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-229(a) prohibits the reduction of a lump sum award to its present value.

State of Tennessee v. Zellburge Gleaves
M2002-02613-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge Cheryl A. Blackburn

The Appellant, Zellburge Gleaves, appeals the sentencing decision of the Davidson County Criminal Court following his guilty plea to one count of aggravated assault. Under the terms of the plea agreement, Gleaves agreed to an eight-year sentence as a Range II multiple offender. The plea agreement further provided that the manner of service of the sentence was to be determined by the trial court. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court ordered total confinement. Gleaves appeals, contending that the trial court erred in failing to grant a sentence of split confinement. After review of the record, we affirm.

Karen Scoggins vs. Larry Scoggins
E2002-02923-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Howell N. Peoples
Karen Thompson Scoggins ("Plaintiff") and Larry Browder Scoggins ("Defendant") were divorced in 2000. The divorce judgment ordered Defendant to use funds from his 401(k) plan to pay off certain marital debts and then to convey the remainder of the 401(k) to Plaintiff. Defendant did not do this. Instead, Defendant filed for bankruptcy, listed Plaintiff as a creditor, and was granted a discharge in bankruptcy. Plaintiff filed a complaint in Chancery Court ("Trial Court") seeking to enforce the divorce judgment. Defendant claimed the debt to Plaintiff was discharged in bankruptcy. The Chancery Court held that the discharge in bankruptcy does not bar Plaintiff from enforcing her rights in Defendant's 401(k) plan. Defendant appeals. We reverse and remand.

Nicole M. Sullivan v. The Yasuda Fire & Marine
W2002-00857-SC-WCM-CV
Authoring Judge: Allen W. Wallace, Sr. J.
Trial Court Judge: Robert L. Childers, Circuit Judge
The trial found the plaintiff suffered a 5 percent disability to her body as a whole as a result of injury to her leg and abdomen, obviously applying the 2 _ times multiplier to the treating physician's impairment rating. As discussed below, the panel has concluded the evidence does not preponderate against the trial court's findings and we affirm.

Arthur Lynn v. Randy Camp
M2002-02708-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.
This case concerns a petition for judicial review filed in chancery court. The petition sought review of the ALJ's order affirming the Petitioner's termination for sleeping on the job in violation of the Arlington Development Center's policy. The chancellor dismissed the Petition. We affirm the Chancellor.

State of Tennessee v. Abdullah Morrison
W2002-00881-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge Joseph B. Dailey

The defendant was convicted of first degree (premeditated) murder. He now contends that the evidence of premeditation was insufficient for a rational trier of fact to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. We hold that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's verdict.

State of Tennessee v. William Wilson
W2001-02601-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith
Trial Court Judge: Judge Joseph B. Dailey

On May 19, 2001, a jury in Memphis convicted the defendant, William Wilson, of aggravated robbery and first degree felony murder. The trial court sentenced him as a Range I Standard Offender to life in prison for the first degree felony murder conviction and to eight (8) years for the aggravated robbery to be served consecutively. The defendant appeals these convictions. He argues four issues on appeal: (1) He was not criminally responsible for his co-defendant's actions, and therefore, not guilty of first degree murder; (2) the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions for aggravated robbery and first degree murder; (3) the trial court erred by failing to charge the affirmative defense of duress; and (4) the trial court erred by sentencing him to eight (8) years consecutive to his life sentence with the possibility of parole. We affirm the trial court's actions with regard to these issues.

State of Tennessee v. Henry Mitchell Dixon
E2002-00731-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith
Trial Court Judge: Judge Phyllis H. Miller

A Sullivan County Jury convicted the appellant, Henry Mitchell Dixon, Jr., also known as "Mackie" Dixon, of one count of attempted first degree murder (Count One), one count of attempted second degree murder (Count Two), one count of attempted aggravated assault (Count Four), two counts of aggravated assault (Counts Three and Five), one count of unauthorized use of a vehicle (Count Six), and one count of aggravated burglary (Count Seven). The trial court sentenced the appellant to an effective twenty-two (22) year sentence as a Range I offender for Counts One through Six and four (4) years probation on Count Seven, to run consecutively to the twenty-two (22) year sentence. The appellant filed a motion for a new trial, which was denied. On appeal, the appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence at trial, his sentence, and the trial court's refusal to set aside the appellant's conviction for attempted first degree murder based on the jury foreman's statement after the trial that there was a mistake as to how the verdict was returned. After a thorough review of the record, we conclude that none of these claims merit relief. However, we must reverse and remand the conviction for attempted second degree murder due to an erroneous jury charge on the definition of "knowingly." In all other respects the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Gene Patton v. Sevier Coun Ty, Tennessee
E2002-02004-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Howell N. Peoples, Special Judge
Trial Court Judge: Rex H. Ogle, Judge
The employer appeals an award of disability benefits for aggravation of a pre-existing condition where there is no detectible anatomical change. The employee challenges the sufficiency of the award and the failure to award the statutory bad faith penalty. We affirm.

Larry Coulter v State of Tennessee
M2002-02688-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge J. Steve Daniel

The petitioner's filing of a motion to reconsider did not toll the running of the thirty day requirement for filing notice of appeal. We conclude that the record evinces no basis for determining that justice requires us to excuse the timely filing of a notice of appeal.

State of Tennessee v. Johnny Lee Lewis
M2002-01350-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge John A. Turnbull

The defendant appealed his convictions on two counts of facilitation of second degree murder and one count of aggravated arson, as well as the effective 65-year sentence. The defendant's appeal raised the following issues: insufficiency of evidence to support the convictions; error in allowing hearsay testimony under the conspiracy exception; error in allowing cross-examination of the defendant during limited purpose jury-out hearing; error in allowing a medical expert to testify outside his area of expertise; failure to instruct the jury on inadequate crime scene investigation; and error in application of "particularly vulnerable" enhancement factor during the sentencing phase. We conclude that the defendant's issues are without merit and affirm the convictions and sentence as imposed by the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Thaddaeus Medford - Dissenting
W2002-00226-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Judge Joseph H. Walker, III
I respectfully dissent from the majority’s holding that the evidence is not sufficient to support the Defendant’s conviction of possession of cocaine with intent to deliver. While the proof in this case is less than overwhelming, I would hold that the circumstantial evidence is sufficient for a reasonable juror to conclude beyond a reasonable doubt that the Defendant was the source of the cocaine found by the police officers. The only other explanation for the cocaine’s presence on the roadside is that some unknown person placed it there, either intentionally or accidentally. While I agree that an accused’s mere proximity to drugs is not alone sufficient to support a finding that the accused possessed them, there are additional circumstances in this case which are indicative of the Defendant’s guilt. As acknowledged by the majority, the facts and circumstances supporting a conviction based solely on circumstantial evidence “must be so strong and cogent as to exclude every other reasonable hypothesis save the guilt of the defendant.” State v. Crawford, 470 S.W.2d 610, 612 (Tenn. 1971) (emphasis added). I do not think that any other reasonable hypothesis explains the presence of the cocaine found in this case, other than the Defendant’s possession of it.

Paul Ivy v. Alton Hesson,
W2003-01026-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Joseph H. Walker, III

W2003-01816-COA-R3-CV
W2003-01816-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Dewey C. Whitenton

State of Tennessee v. Marcus Antwone Gillard
W2002-01189-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge Donald H. Allen

The defendant was convicted of aggravated robbery, facilitating aggravated kidnapping, and aggravated burglary. He now appeals these convictions contending that the (1) evidence was not sufficient to support the convictions, (2) trial court erred in refusing to dismiss the charge of aggravated kidnapping or in refusing to merge the charge of aggravated kidnapping with his aggravated robbery charge, (3) trial court erred by denying him his right to effective cross-examination by stating that questions regarding the prior inconsistent statements of the victim would allow the admission of more damaging testimony against the defendant, and (4) trial court erred in sentencing. We hold that the trial court erred in applying enhancement factor four; however, the error was harmless. We affirm the judgments of the trial court in all other respects.

Mitchell Tarver v. State of Tennessee
W2002-01662-CCA-R3-CO
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith
Trial Court Judge: Judge William B. Acree

The pro se petitioner, Mitchell Tarver, appeals from the denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. We conclude that the circuit court erred in summarily dismissing the habeas petition under the peculiar circumstances presented in the instant case. We therefore reverse the judgment of the circuit court and remand for proceedings consistent with this opinion.

W2003-00303-COA-R3-CV
W2003-00303-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Roger A. Page

State of Tennessee v. Thaddaeus Medford
W2002-00226-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge James Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Joseph H. Walker, III
Before us are the consolidated appeals of Thaddaeus Medford who, in his first trial, was convicted of Class E felony evading arrest. The jury in that trial deadlocked on the companion charges of cocaine possession with intent to deliver and drug paraphernalia possession. Upon retrial, the defendant was convicted of the two possession offenses. He appeals the legal sufficiency of his evading arrest and cocaine possession convictions, complains that testimony about the street value of cocaine and money found in his automobile was erroneously admitted, and argues that his constitutional right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures was violated. Based on our review of the record, the briefs of the parties, and applicable law, we affirm the defendant’s evading arrest conviction. As to the cocaine possession conviction, we affirm the trial court’s evidentiary rulings and rejection of the defendant’s motion to suppress, but we, nevertheless, reverse the conviction because the evidence is legally insufficient.