State of Tennessee v. Bobby Joe Waddle
E2024-00132-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John W. Campbell, Sr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Stacy L. Street

The Defendant, Bobby Joe Waddle, was convicted in the Washington County Criminal
Court of unlawful possession of a firearm after having been convicted of a felony crime of
violence and was sentenced as a Range III, career offender to thirty years in confinement.
On appeal, the Defendant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support his
conviction and that the trial court erred by refusing to bifurcate his trial. Based on our
review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Christopher Oberton Curry, Jr.
W2022-00814-SC-R11-CD
Authoring Judge: Roger A. Page
Trial Court Judge: Roy B. Morgan, Jr.

Christopher Oberton Curry, Jr. (“Defendant”) sought this Court’s review of his 2022
conviction for unlawful possession of a firearm after having been convicted of a felony
crime of violence. Pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-17-1307, unlawful
possession of a firearm by a convicted felon is a Class E felony; however, if the prior
conviction is for a felony crime of violence, the punishment is increased to a Class B felony.
At Defendant’s trial in the present case, the State introduced a certified judgment of
conviction for Defendant’s 2017 conviction for robbery, and the trial judge instructed the
jury that robbery is a crime of violence. Robbery, however, is not included in the statutory
definition of crimes of violence set forth in Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-17-
1301(3). Defendant was convicted and received an effective ten-year sentence. On appeal,
Defendant argues, among other things, that the evidence was insufficient to support his
conviction because the State failed to establish that the predicate felony of robbery was a
crime of violence. The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed, concluding that robbery is a
crime of violence despite its absence from the statutory definition of the term. We granted
Defendant’s application for permission to appeal to consider whether robbery is
encompassed within the statutory definition of “crime of violence” and to determine
whether the evidence at trial was sufficient to support Defendant’s conviction. After
review, we agree with the lower courts that robbery can be a “crime of violence” within the
definition contained in section 39-17-1301(3). However, we conclude that whether robbery
is a “crime of violence” in a particular unlawful possession of a firearm case is a question
for a properly instructed jury, not the trial judge. Because the State did not present sufficient
evidence from which a reasonable jury could conclude that Defendant’s prior robbery was
a crime of violence, we reverse, in part, the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeals and
vacate the judgment of the trial court on Count 1. The case is remanded to the trial court
for entry of a new judgment reducing the conviction in Count 1 to a Class E felony and for
further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

State of Tennessee v. Terrance K. Martin
M2024-00480-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Timothy L. Easter
Trial Court Judge: Judge Russell Parkes

Defendant, Terrance K. Martin, was charged in a three-count indictment with two counts of sale of 0.5 grams or more of methamphetamine and one count of sale of 0.5 grams or more of cocaine.  A jury convicted Defendant as charged, and the trial court imposed a total effective sentence of twenty-eight years’ incarceration.  Defendant appeals his convictions, arguing that the State presented insufficient proof that he knowingly sold the drugs.  We affirm the judgments of the trial court. 

State of Tennessee v. Christopher Allen Keyt
E2024-00046-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jill Bartee Ayers
Trial Court Judge: Judge Sandra Donaghy

Defendant, Christopher Allen Keyt, was convicted by a Monroe County jury of possession
with the intent to sell or deliver 0.5 grams or more of methamphetamine (count one) and
possession of a firearm during the attempt to commit a dangerous felony (count two). The
trial court sentenced Defendant to thirteen years for count one and four years for count two,
to run consecutively. Defendant appeals, arguing that the trial court erred by denying a
motion to suppress evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant, that the evidence was
insufficient to support his convictions, that the trial court erred in qualifying a detective as
an expert in the methamphetamine trade in Monroe County, and that the trial court erred
by restricting Defendant’s questioning of the detective. Upon review of the entire record,
the briefs and oral arguments of the parties, and the applicable law, we affirm the judgments
of the trial court.

In Re Austynn F.
E2023-01707-COA-R3-PT
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Neal McBrayer
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Richard B. Armstrong, Jr.

A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to his child. The court found one ground for termination: abandonment by failure to visit. Because the trial court’s order fails to resolve conflicting testimony concerning the father’s visitation with the child, we vacate the judgment and remand for specific findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Craig William Joel v. Chattanooga Fire and Police Pension Fund
E2024-00681-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Per Curiam
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Jeffrey M. Atherton

Because the order from which the appellant has filed an appeal does not constitute a final appealable judgment, this Court lacks jurisdiction to consider this appeal.

Corderro Avant v. State of Tennessee
W2023-01409-CCA-R3-ECN
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Carolyn Wade Blackett

In 2014, a Shelby County jury convicted the Petitioner, Corderro Avant, and a codefendant, of several charges against several victims of a shooting, including one count of first degree premeditated murder; one count of attempted first degree murder resulting in serious bodily injury; nine counts of attempted first degree murder; and eleven counts of employing a firearm during the commission of a dangerous felony. The trial court imposed an effective life sentence plus twenty-one years. The Petitioner appealed and this court affirmed the judgments. State v. Avant, No. W2018-01154-CCA-R3-CD, 2019 WL 3072131, at *1 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2019), perm. app. denied (Tenn. 2020). Thereafter, the Petitioner filed a petition for a writ of error coram nobis. The trial court denied the petition after a hearing on the basis that the statute of limitations had expired. On appeal, the Petitioner contends that his petition was timely and should have been granted based on newly discovered evidence. After review, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.

State of Tennessee v. Joseph Ray Daniels
M2023-00158-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Camille R. McMullen
Trial Court Judge: Judge David D. Wolfe

The Defendant, Joseph Ray Daniels, confessed to the beating death of his five-year-old son, Joseph Clyde Daniels III, and was convicted by a jury of second-degree murder, first-degree felony murder, aggravated child abuse, making a false police report, and tampering with evidence.  He subsequently received an effective sentence of life imprisonment.   In this appeal, the Defendant argues the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress his confession (1) because the State failed to corroborate his extrajudicial confession under the modified trustworthiness standard outlined in State v. Bishop, 431 S.W.3d 22 (Tenn. 2014), and (2) because his post-polygraph video recorded statement was obtained by law enforcement through coercive interrogation techniques including an express promise of leniency.  The Defendant also argues the trial court abused its discretion in failing to exclude as hearsay utterances by the victim’s three-year-old brother, “Joe dead, Joe dead, Joe dead,” and the response of his aunt, “Yes baby, Joe dead;” and in failing to exclude as not relevant and unfairly prejudicial Facebook messages his wife exchanged with a paramour leading up to the victim’s death.  We affirm.

State of Tennessee v. Keiresha Majors
M2023-01182-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Jennifer Smith

A Davidson County jury found the Defendant, Keiresha Majors, guilty of one count of second degree murder, for which she was sentenced to twenty-five years’ incarceration. On appeal, the Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the convicting evidence, the admission of recordings of a Facebook Live broadcast she recorded shortly after the victim’s murder, the restriction of cross-examination of a witness, and the length of her sentence. After review, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Ladon Relliford v. Jerry Burks, et al.
W2022-00997-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Jeffrey Usman
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Gadson W. Perry

The plaintiff took his car to a body shop for repair. The owner of the body shop, who had obtained title of the vehicle through an unknown means, sold the car to the defendant, CarMax. The plaintiff brought suit against the owner of the body shop and CarMax, seeking the return of his car. The trial court granted summary judgment to CarMax, finding it held valid title as a good faith purchaser for value. Because we find that the undisputed facts do not support a conclusion that CarMax is entitled to judgment as a matter of law, we reverse the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Zyqiius Quade' Barnes
M2024-00016-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Mark J. Fishburn

A Davidson County jury convicted the Defendant, Zyqiius Quade’ Barnes, of one count of second degree murder and one count of reckless aggravated assault. The trial court sentenced the Defendant to an effective sentence of seventeen years of incarceration. On appeal, the Defendant argues that the trial court erred when it included a “defense of a third person” instruction in its jury charge and when it enhanced his sentence. After review, we affirm the trial court’s judgments.

Jason Collins v. State of Tennessee
W2023-01580-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Matthew J. Wilson
Trial Court Judge: Judge Donald H. Allen

Petitioner, Jason Collins, was convicted of one count of possession of .5 grams or more of methamphetamine with the intent to sell, one count of possession of .5 grams or more of methamphetamine with the intent to deliver, and one count of possession of drug paraphernalia. The trial court merged the two methamphetamine convictions and sentenced Petitioner to serve a total effective sentence of twenty years, eleven months, and twenty-nine days in confinement. This court affirmed Petitioner’s convictions and sentences on direct appeal. Petitioner then filed a petition for post-conviction relief in which he claimed ineffective assistance of counsel, and the post-conviction court denied the petition after a hearing. On appeal, Petitioner asserts that trial counsel was ineffective in failing to file a motion for new trial, in failing to seek suppression of drugs and other evidence seized from his home, and in failing to conduct a “complete and accurate” investigation of a defense witness. After review, we affirm the judgment of the postconviction court.

Sandra Easley v. City of Memphis
W2023-00437-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge J. Steven Stafford
Trial Court Judge: Judge Damita J. Dandridge

Plaintiff was injured after attempting to cross a street outside of a crosswalk and being struck by a city-owned vehicle driven by a city employee. The trial court found that the city was vicariously liable for the employee-driver’s negligence and directly liable for its negligent hiring and retaining of the employee-driver. The trial court ultimately found the plaintiff 10% at fault for her injuries. The city appealed, and this Court reversed, finding that there was no proof of negligent hiring and that the evidence preponderated against the trial court’s allocation of fault. Instead, this Court concluded that the plaintiff was at least 50% at fault, barring recovery. The Tennessee Supreme Court vacated the judgment as failing to afford the trial court’s findings of fact appropriate deference, but acknowledged the plaintiff’s failure to appeal the conclusion that the negligent hiring finding was unsupported. On remand, we affirm in part, reverse in part, vacate in part, and remand the matter to the trial court for the re-allocation of fault and calculation of damages.

Benjamin McCurry v. Agness McCurry
E2024-01719-COA-T10B-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Neal McBrayer
Trial Court Judge: Judge D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.

Petitioner seeks accelerated review of the denial of two motions to recuse the trial judge. After a de novo review, we affirm the denial of both motions.

State of Tennessee, ex rel., Stephany V. Lopez v. Justin M. Finch
W2024-01824-COA-T10B-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge J. Steven Stafford
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Michael Mansfield

Appellant filed this petition for recusal appeal without including either the motion to recuse filed in the trial court or the trial court’s order denying the motion to recuse. As such, we dismiss this appeal.

SCOTT BAKER ET AL. v. LARRY BASKIN ET AL.
M2023-00433-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Frank G. Clement, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Patricia Head Moskal

Buyers of a residential home brought action against sellers for 1) breach of contract, 2)
negligent misrepresentation, 3) negligence, 4) negligence per se, 5) gross negligence, 6)
residential disclosures violations, and 7) fraud. The claims arise from the discovery of a
sinkhole months after the sale. The sinkhole was not indicated “through the contour lines
on the property’s recorded plat,” see Tenn. Code Ann. § 66-5-212(c) (2015), and the sellers
insist they had no knowledge of a sinkhole on the property. For these reasons, they did not
disclose the existence of the sinkhole on the Tennessee Residential Property Condition
Disclosure form. Nevertheless, the proof at trial established that one of the sellers, Larry
Baskin, while mowing the lawn, discovered a depression in the yard six months prior to
listing the property for sale, which he believed to be caused by rotting roots from a tree that
had been removed years earlier. He filled the depression with two four-by-four, pressuretreated,
rot-resistant posts and topsoil. Because it was near a downspout, he also placed the
plastic bag from the topsoil over the posts, which he covered with more soil and grass. The
property was sold seven months later, during which time Mr. Baskin did not notice the area
“concaving or dipping in any way” even though he mowed regularly over the area with his
500-pound riding mower. Following a bench trial, the court dismissed all claims except the
negligence claim. Significantly, the court dismissed the claim for negligent
misrepresentation because the purchase agreement contained an “as is” clause. However,
the court held that Larry Baskin was liable under the claim for common law negligence,
finding that he “breached the duty of reasonable care by not informing the Buyers of the
existence of the hole prior to their purchase of the Property. The harm resulting from Mr.
Baskin’s breach was damage to the value of the Property.” The court awarded the buyers
compensatory damages of $55,000 for the diminution in value of the property.
Additionally, finding the buyers to be the prevailing parties according to the purchase
agreement, the trial court awarded them attorney’s fees and costs. This appeal followed,
with the sellers challenging Mr. Baskin’s liability under the negligence claim and the
buyers challenging the dismissal of the gross negligence claim. For the reasons explained
below, we affirm the dismissal of the claim for gross negligence; however, we reverse the
finding of Mr. Baskin’s liability based on the claim of negligence because “a seller’s
liability for the failure to disclose such material facts in a real estate transaction is
coextensive with a party’s liability for fraudulent or negligent misrepresentation.” Fayne
v. Vincent, 301 S.W.3d 162, 177 (Tenn. 2009). Because we have affirmed the dismissal of
the claim for gross negligence and reversed the ruling concerning the negligence claim, we
also vacate the award of damages and attorney’s fees to the buyers. In that the sellers are
now the prevailing parties, we remand with instructions to award the sellers the reasonable
and necessary attorney’s fees and costs they are entitled to recover pursuant to the parties’
contract.

In Re Estate of Clifton Dates, Jr.
W2024-00488-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Kristi M. Davis
Trial Court Judge: Judge Joe Townsend

This is an appeal from a dispute over a piece of real estate in Shelby County, Tennessee. The property owner executed a quit claim deed transferring ownership of the property to his daughter, who was also his attorney-in-fact, shortly before he died in 2023. After his death, the man’s surviving spouse filed a petition to set the deed aside, claiming that the daughter obtained the deed by undue influence. The trial court held a bench trial and entered an order setting the deed aside. The daughter timely appeals to this Court. Discerning no error, we affirm.

State of Tennessee, ex rel., Jabrunkaka R. Franklin v. Justin M. Finch
W2024-01822-COA-T10B-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge J. Steven Stafford
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Michael Mansfield

Appellant filed this petition for recusal appeal without including either the motion to recuse filed in the trial court or the trial court’s order denying the motion to recuse. As such, we dismiss this appeal.

State of Tennessee v. April R. Austin
E2024-00307-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Ross Dyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Steven Wayne Sword

The defendant, April R. Austin, was indicted by the Knox County Garnd Jury for four counts of theft of property valued over $2500 and four counts of theft of property valued over $1000. The defendant pled guilty to one count of theft of property valued over $2500 and one count of shoplifting. Per the terms of the pela agreement, the defendant agreed to concurrent sentences of three years for her theft conviction and eleven months and twenty-nine days for her shoplifting conviction with the manner of service to be determined by the trial court. 

State of Tennessee v. Keith Lamar March
E2024-00672-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Ross Dyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Hector Sanchez

The defendant, Keith Lamar March, was convicted by a Knox County Criminal Court jury of unlawful possession of a weapon after having been convicted of a felony crime of violence, failure to drive on the right side of the roadway, and evading arrest. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court imposed an effective sentence of fourteen years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. 

Robert Ferguson v. M. Brown Construction, Inc. et al.
M2022-01637-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Neal McBrayer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Larry J. Wallace

A property owner hired a local contractor to build a custom-designed home. A payment dispute arose midway through construction, and the contractor stopped working. The owner paid others to repair and complete the home. Then he filed suit against the contractor asserting multiple theories of recovery. Among other things, the trial court found the contractor liable for breach of contract and fraudulent misrepresentation. As compensatory damages, it awarded the owner the additional costs he incurred to repair and complete the home above the contract price. We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand for recalculation of compensatory damages.

In Re Charles B.
M2024-00360-COA-R3-PT
Authoring Judge: Judge Jeffrey Usman
Trial Court Judge: Judge Ryan J. Moore

Mother and Father appeal the termination of their parental rights. As to Mother, the trial court found three grounds for termination: substantial noncompliance with a parenting plan, persistent conditions, and failure to manifest an ability and willingness to assume custody. Regarding Father, the trial court found four grounds for termination: severe child abuse, imprisonment for two years for conduct qualifying as severe child abuse, imprisonment for ten years when the child is under eight years of age, and failure to manifest an ability and willingness to assume custody. The trial court also determined that terminating each parent’s rights was in the child’s best interest. The trial court properly determined that a termination ground existed as to each parent and that terminating each parent’s rights was in the child’s best interest. We affirm.

State of Tennessee v. Esperanza Mariaelena Joy Flores
M2024-00188-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Timothy L. Easter
Trial Court Judge: Judge Kathryn Wall Olita

A Montgomery County jury convicted Defendant, Esperanza Mariaelena Joy Flores, of driving under the influence (“DUI”), DUI per se, failure to yield to an emergency vehicle, and possession of an open alcohol container. Defendant argues on appeal that: (1) the trial court erred in not dismissing the charges after the State failed to preserve evidence; (2) the trial court improperly limited her cross-examination of a witness; (3) the trial court improperly limited Defendant’s testimony; (4) the prosecutor made improper closing argument; (5) the evidence was insufficient to support her conviction for failure to yield to an emergency vehicle; (6) the record was not properly preserved because a court reporter was not provided to transcribe the proceedings; and (7) she is entitled to cumulative error relief. After review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Teresa Thompson Locke et al. v. Jason D. Aston, M.D. et al.
M2022-01820-SC-R11-SV
Authoring Judge: Per Curiam
Trial Court Judge: Amanda McClendon

This case is before the Court on the Rule 11 application of Plaintiffs Teresa
Thompson Locke and Randy Locke (collectively the “Lockes”). This Court granted the
Rule 11 application on March 6, 2024. The matter was fully briefed and oral arguments
were conducted on December 4, 2024. We have determined that the appeal should be
dismissed, and the Court of Appeals judgment and related trial court orders vacated, for
the reasons set forth below.

Deborah Fly et al. v. Haley Rae Fly et al.
M2022-01089-COA-R3-JV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Neal McBrayer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Charles B. Tatum

A grandparent petitioned for visitation with her grandchild. The juvenile court found that the loss or severe reduction of visitation with the grandparent would cause severe emotional harm. The child’s mother appeals. Because the evidence preponderates against the court’s finding that denial of grandparent visitation would cause severe emotional harm, we reverse.