State of Tennessee v. Demetrie Owens
M2003-01454-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith
Trial Court Judge: Judge W. Charles Lee

The appellant, Demetrie Owens, was found guilty by a jury on two counts of theft of property valued between $1,000 and $10,000 and one count of possession of contraband in a penal institution. The jury found the appellant not guilty of possession of cocaine with the intent to sell. At the sentencing hearing, the trial court merged the two theft convictions and sentenced the appellant to three years and four months on the theft and four years and eight months on the drug offense. The trial court ordered the sentences to run consecutively. On appeal, the appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence, the jury instructions on the charge of possession of contraband in a penal institution, and his sentence. Because the appellant failed to include his challenge to the jury instructions in a motion for new trial, that issue is waived. As to the remaining issues, we determine that the evidence was sufficient to sustain the convictions and that the trial court properly sentenced the appellant.

State of Tennessee v. Buster Chandler
E2003-02619-CCA-R3-HC
Authoring Judge: Judge James Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Mary Beth Leibowitz

Aggrieved of the summary dismissal of his petition for habeas corpus relief, the petitioner appeals. Based upon Roger L. Hickman v. State, ___ S.W.3d ___, No. E2002-01916-SC-R11-PC (Tenn., Knoxville, Sept. 2, 2004), we affirm.

Raymond Jones v. State of Tennessee
E2003-00580-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Judge Robert E. Cupp

Petitioner, Raymond Roger Jones, appeals the Washington County Criminal Court's dismissal of his pro se combined motion to reopen his post-conviction petition, petition for writ of error coram nobis, and petition for DNA analysis. Petitioner was convicted by a jury in the Knox County Criminal Court of two counts of first degree murder. He received consecutive life sentences. This Court affirmed Defendant's convictions and sentences on direct appeal. See State v. Jones, 735 S.W.2d 803 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1987). Petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief in the Washington County Criminal Court. The trial court dismissed the petition, and this Court affirmed. See Raymond Roger Jones v. State, No. 03C01-9102-CR-00068, 1991 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 584, (Tenn. Crim. App. at Knoxville, July 26, 1991), perm. to app. denied (Tenn. 1992). On June 22, 2001, Petitioner filed a pro se motion to reopen his post-conviction petition, alleging that the United States Supreme Court's decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S. Ct. 2348, 147 L. Ed. 2d 435 (2000), established a new rule of constitutional law requiring retroactive application to his case. Petitioner subsequently filed a supplemental request for DNA analysis. The trial court dismissed the motion and denied Petitioner's request for DNA Analysis. Petitioner appeals. After reviewing the record, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Frank W. Johnson v. Glen Turner, Warden
W2004-00177-CCA-R3-HC
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Judge Jon Kerry Blackwood

The petitioner, Frank W. Johnson, pled guilty to second degree murder and was sentenced to thirteen and one-half years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. Subsequently, he filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, alleging that he pled guilty to an illegal sentence. The trial court denied the petition, and the petitioner now appeals. Upon review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Billy Wayne McCormick
M2003-03039-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge Steve R. Dozier

The defendant appeals from convictions of aggravated assault and evading arrest. He contends that the evidence was insufficient to support the verdicts, and that the sentence of eight years for aggravated assault was excessive. After careful consideration and a thorough review of the record, the convictions and the sentences are affirmed.

State of Tennessee, Department of Children's Services v. B.F., et al.
E2004-00338-COA-R3-PT
Authoring Judge: Judge Sharon G. Lee
Trial Court Judge: Judge Dwight E. Stokes

This parental termination case presents the Court with two issues: (1) whether a case manager can testify regarding facts about which she has no personal knowledge but which are documented in a case file not made an exhibit, and (2) whether the guardian ad litem of a minor child can testify as a witness. At the trial of this case, the State of Tennessee, Department of Children's Services presented only two witnesses: the case manager who had only been working on the file for six months and the child's guardian ad litem. The case manager had no firsthand knowledge of the facts except what she had read in the case file which was not present at the trial and not introduced into evidence. The defendant objected on the basis of hearsay and the trial court allowed the case manager to testify under the business records exception to the hearsay rule. The guardian ad litem testified concerning her investigation into the matter over the Defendant's objection. We hold that the case manager's testimony was hearsay and was not admissible under the business records exception to the hearsay rule. We hold that the guardian ad litem's testimony was not admissible pursuant to Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 40 which forbids such testimony. Because of the exclusion of the testimony of these witnesses, the trial court should have granted Defendant's motion for a directed verdict. Accordingly, we vacate the judgment of the trial court and remand to the Juvenile Court for Sevier County for a new trial.

State of Tennessee v. Ronald Harrison
W2003-00685-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge Chris B. Craft

The Defendant, Ronald Harrison, was indicted for rape, and he pled guilty to the lesser-included offense of sexual battery. After holding a sentencing hearing, the trial court denied the Defendant’s request for judicial diversion, suspended sentence and probation, and sentenced the Defendant to two years in the county workhouse. The Defendant appeals, contending that the trial court erred when it: (1) denied his application for judicial diversion; and (2) sentenced him to two years. After thoroughly reviewing the record, we conclude that the trial court did not err when it denied the Defendant’s application for judicial diversion. Further, we hold that the trial court improperly enhanced the Defendant’s sentences in light of Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. __, 124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004), and we reduce the Defendant’s sentence in accordance with this opinion to the presumptive minimum of one year. We remand the case for the entry of appropriate judgments of conviction.

Charles Fredrick Glanzman v. Joyce Bryant Glanzman
W2003-03067-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Judge George H. Brown

This is a divorce case. The husband appeals from the trial court’s divorce decree distributing the marital and separate property and awarding the wife alimony in futuro. We affirm.
 

Phillip Russell Lewis, et al., v. James Howard Bowen, et al.
M2003-00985-COA-R3-CV-
Authoring Judge: Judge Patricia L. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Judge Don R. Ash

The plaintiffs filed a complaint for repayment of borrowed money. The defendant, who was living in Ohio at the time, did not to respond to the complaint. The plaintiffs then filed a motion for default judgment, to which the defendant again failed to respond. After a hearing, the trial court granted the default judgment. The judgment was domesticated in Ohio, and substantial monthly garnishments were ordered from the defendant’s trust funds to satisfy the judgment. More than two years after the garnishments began, and almost three years after the default judgment was rendered, the defendant took his first step to contest the plaintiffs’ claim, by filing a motion for relief from judgment. The trial court denied the motion. We affirm the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Charles R. Turner
M2003-02064-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge Carol L. Soloman

The Appellant, Charles R. Turner, was convicted by a Davidson County jury of two counts of identify theft and sentenced to concurrent sentences of three years, with service of one year in confinement. In addition, Turner was ordered to pay restitution. On appeal, Turner raises four issues for our review: (1) whether the trial court erred by failing to suppress an in-court identification by a witness; (2) whether the evidence was sufficient to support his convictions; (3) whether the trial court imposed excessive sentences; and (4) whether the trial court erred in determining the amount of restitution. After review of the record, we conclude that the identification issue is without merit and the evidence is legally sufficient to support the convictions. Accordingly, we affirm the judgments of conviction. However, after review, we conclude that the trial court failed to sentence the Appellant in accordance with the 1989 Sentencing Act and to properly determine the Appellant’s ability to pay the ordered restitution. Accordingly, we remand the case for a proper determination of these sentencing issues.

State of Tennessee v. Chance Coy Herron
M2004-00553-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge Lillie Ann Sells

The defendant appeals, on a certified question of law, the trial court’s failure to suppress evidence resulting from his warrantless arrest and search of his home. Because the defendant has failed to properly reserve a certified question of law for appeal, we dismiss.

Amanda Construction, Inc. v. Charles L. White, et al.
W2004-00521-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Walter L. Evans

This appeal involves a homeowner’s attempt to pierce the corporate veil to reach the shareholders of a construction company. During the course of the litigation, the construction company was administratively dissolved, and the homeowner filed a motion to join as defendants the shareholders, officers, and directors. The trial court granted judgment in favor of the homeowner against the construction company for breach of contract, but denied the homeowner’s motion to join the shareholders, officers, and directors. We affirm.
 

In Re: S.B.D.W., a minor child born, January 14, 1999
W2004-00863-COA-R3-PT
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor J. Steven Stafford

The trial court terminated parents’ rights based on abandonment. Father appeals. We affirm.

David Stupp, et al. v. Phillips Auto Body, Llc and First American Insurance Company, et al.
W2003-00825-SC-WCM-CV
Authoring Judge: James F. Butler, Sp. J.
Trial Court Judge: Walter L. Evans, Chancellor
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tennessee Code Annotated Section 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The trial court determined that the plaintiff sustained a 25% vocational impairment to the body as a whole. The defendant asserts that: 1) the plaintiff failed to carry his burden of proof of permanent injury; 2) the trial court erred in finding plaintiff had an operative disk lesion which necessitated surgery; 3) the trial court erred in not granting defendant's motion for additional facts or to amend judgement; and 4) the trial court erred in finding that Dr. Anthony Segal's charges were reasonable and necessary and in granting plaintiff's motion for discretionary costs. Plaintiff asserts that the trial court erred when it awarded plaintiff a 25% disability impairment to the body as a whole, urging that the award should have been higher. We agree with the position of the plaintiff, and for the reasons set forth below, we modify the judgment of the trial court to award a forty-five percent (45%) vocational disability to the body as a whole. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e) (1999) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Chancery Court Affirmed as Modified JAMES F. BUTLER, SP. J., in which JANICE M. HOLDER, J., and JAMES L. WEATHERFORD, SR. J., joined. Richard W. Vaughn, Jr., Milan Tennessee, for the appellants, Phillips Auto Body, LLC and First American Insurance Company. David G. Mills, Cordova, Tennessee, for the appellee, David Stupp. MEMORANDUM OPINION Plaintiff was, at time of trial, 38 years old, married with four children, and attended school to the 11th grade. Plaintiff was employed as an auto body frame technician at Phillips Auto Body, LLC. The company was owned by Mary and Lou Phillips who also worked there. Plaintiff's duties consisted of vehicle body and frame work. At the time of his injury he was working in the shop on a pickup truck. Plaintiff alleges that on July 1, 21, Plaintiff and a co-worker, Scott Taylor, were lifting the hood off of a pickup truck when Plaintiff sustained an injury to his neck. He notified Lou Phillips immediately. Plaintiff worked the remainder of the day on light duty. The next day Plaintiff still had pain and went to Baptist Minor Medical and then to Campbell Clinic. He was seen by Dr. Douglas Linville at the Campbell Clinic who sent him to physical therapy and prescribed medication. He returned to work the next day. On July 17th, 21, Plaintiff went to physical therapy and returned to work. A discussion ensued between Plaintiff and Mary Phillips because she thought he had been gone longer than she expected, and Plaintiff was terminated that day. Plaintiff continued his physical therapy after termination and was referred to Dr. Ashley Park, also at the Campbell Clinic. Dr. Park ordered an MRI and injected Plaintiff with two steroid blocks. He was then referred to Dr. John Brophy and ultimately retrieved his medical records from Campbell Clinic. His medical records contained a comment about a previous lawsuit and that the Plaintiff had been videotaped "popping wheelies" on a four-wheeler. Dr. Brophy reviewed the MRI and found cervical spondylosis, worse on the left at C5-6 and C6-7, without definite evidence of nerve root or spinal cord compression. Wanting to rule out nerve root compression, he ordered a myelogram/CT scan and later ordered a bilateral upper extremity EMG/nerve conduction study. After reviewing these studies, according to Plaintiff, Dr. Brophy told him that he did not hurt himself at work, that there was nothing wrong with him, and that he should go back to work immediately. Plaintiff thereafter sought the services of Dr. Anthony Segal, a neurosurgeon and provided him with his MRI for review. Dr. Segal ultimately performed surgery on the Plaintiff. After his recovery period, he went back to work for the same company which was under new ownership. At trial, Plaintiff was doing the same work that he was doing prior to his injury with the exception of the heavy lifting. Medical Evidence Dr. John Brophy initially saw the Plaintiff on March 11, 22. He reviewed the Plaintiff's MRI and opined that Plaintiff had cervical spondylosis, worse on the left at C- 5-6 and C-6-7, without definite evidence of nerve root or spinal cord compression. Based on Plaintiff's severity of pain, Dr. Brophy ordered a cervical myelogram/CT scan to rule out nerve root compression. His plan was that if the myelogram demonstrated evidence of nerve root compression, they would discuss surgery. If -2-

Anita J. Vedder v. North American Mortgage Co., et al.
M2003-01682-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Robert E. Corlew, III

This case involves a homeowner who defaulted on her home mortgage. After the holder of the note commenced foreclosure proceedings, the homeowner filed suit in the Circuit Court for Rutherford County asserting numerous claims against the original mortgagee, the subsequent purchasers of the note, and an executive employed by one of the subsequent purchasers. The trial court granted the defendants' motion to dismiss the homeowner's complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. The homeowner appealed and, while the appeal was pending, requested the trial court to vacate its earlier decision for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The trial court denied the homeowner's motion. We now affirm both of the trial court's decisions.

Gibraltar Taft Highway Limited Partnership v. The Town of Walden, et al.
E2003-02523-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Howell N. Peoples

Gibraltar Taft Highway Limited Partnership, through its general partner, The Raines Group ("the plaintiff"), filed an application with the Town of Walden's Board of Aldermen ("the Board"), seeking a permit to build a townhouse project on property located within Walden. The Board denied the plaintiff's application. The plaintiff then filed a petition for writ of certiorari in the trial court. Following a hearing, that court upheld the decision of the Board, finding that the Board had not acted illegally, arbitrarily, or capriciously in rejecting the application. The plaintiff appeals, contending that the trial court erred in its determination. We affirm.

State of Tennessee v. Jimmy Ray Dockery
E2004-00696-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge James Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Phyllis H. Miller

The defendant, Jimmy Ray Dockery, appeals the Sullivan County Criminal Court's decision to deny probation on his two-year sentence for attempt to fraudulently obtain a controlled substance. Based on our review of the record, we affirm the judgment.

Jeffrey Scott West v. Sharon Ann West
E2004-00422-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Samuel H. Payne

Jeffrey Scott West (“Father”) filed a petition against his former wife, Sharon Ann West (“Mother”), seeking to modify the parties’ Permanent Parenting Plan, which plan had not required Mother to pay child support due to the fact she was unemployed. The trial court, finding that, since the entry of the parenting plan, Mother had had a two-year gross income of over $25,000, held that there had been a substantial and material change in circumstances justifying an order requiring that Mother pay child support of $290 per month. Mother appeals, arguing that the trial court erred in ordering her to pay child support and in the methodology used by the court in calculating child support. We affirm.

Wilburn Lee Brown, Jr., v. State of Tennessee Department of Children's Services
E2004-01272-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Vernon Neal

This appeal involves allegations of sexual abuse brought against Wilburn Lee Brown, Jr., ("Petitioner") by his stepdaughter. After the allegations were investigated, DCS concluded there was substantial and material evidence to support the allegations and the report of abuse would be "validated" pursuant to Tenn. Comp. R. & Regs. 0250-7-9-.02. Because Petitioner was employed at a youth development center, he was notified that his employer would be informed that he was the indicated perpetrator in a "validated" report of child sexual abuse and that Petitioner was no longer allowed to have access to children. After exhausting his administrative appeals, Petitioner appealed to the Trial Court. The Trial Court concluded there was substantial and material evidence to support the allegations of abuse and affirmed. Petitioner appeals and we, likewise, affirm.

Matthew Lawson, et al., v. Edgewater Hotels, Inc., et al.
E2003-03093-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Ben W. Hooper, II

Matthew Lawson, by his mother and next friend, Shirley Lawson, and Ms. Lawson, individually (collectively "the plaintiffs") brought an action for negligence against Edgewater Hotels, Inc., and Stokely Hospitality Properties, Inc. (collectively "the defendants"), alleging that Matthew sustained injuries as a consequence of swimming in the indoor pool at the defendants' hotel. According to the plaintiffs, Matthew sustained these injuries (1) due to the excessive amount of chlorine in the pool water and/or (2) because the defendants failed to properly ventilate the indoor portion of the pool. The defendants moved for summary judgment. The trial court granted the motion as to both of the plaintiffs' theories. The plaintiffs appeal. We affirm the trial court's judgment with respect to the plaintiffs' allegation that the defendants' pool contained excessive levels of chlorine. However, we vacate the trial court's judgment with respect to the allegation that the defendants' indoor pool was not properly ventilated. We hold that the defendants failed to meet their burden on summary judgment with respect to this claim.

Alan Gardner v. Anesthesia & Pain Consultants, P.C.
E2003-03027-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Sharon G. Lee
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Richard E. Ladd

This appeal arises from the decision of Anesthesia & Pain Consultants, P.C. ("A&PC") to terminate the employment of Dr. Alan Gardner. After A&PC fired Dr. Gardner, he brought this action alleging breach of employment contract, fraudulent and negligent misrepresentation, promissory estoppel, and promissory fraud. The trial court granted A&PC summary judgment on the misrepresentation claims. At the close of Dr. Gardner's proof at trial, the trial court granted A&PC a directed verdict on his claims of breach of contract and promissory estoppel. The jury returned a verdict in favor of A&PC on the promissory fraud claim. We affirm the judgment of the trial court in all respects.

State of Tennessee v. Mario Merritt
W2003-02868-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Judge James C. Beasley, Jr.

The appellant, Mario Merritt, was convicted by a jury in the Shelby County Criminal Court of especially aggravated robbery. Following a hearing, the trial court sentenced the appellant to twenty-five years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The appellant now brings this appeal challenging the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction. Upon review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Rosendo Reyna
W2004-00365-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge Bernie Weinman

The Appellant, Rosendo Reyna, appeals his convictions for multiple felony drug offenses by a Shelby County jury. On appeal, Reyna raises the single issue of whether the evidence is sufficient to support his convictions. After review, we find the evidence sufficient. Accordingly, the judgments of conviction are affirmed. However, because the record reflects that the offenses were not properly merged, we remand for merger and entry of corrected judgments.

State of Tennessee v. Christopher Kirkendall
W2003-02393-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Judge W. Fred Axley

The appellant, Christopher Kirkendall, was convicted by a jury of aggravated robbery. Following a hearing, the trial court sentenced the appellant to twelve years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The appellant now appeals, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence and the sentence imposed by the trial court. Upon review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court as modified.

State of Tennessee v. Christopher Kirkendall - Concurring
W2003-02393-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Gary R. Wade
Trial Court Judge: Judge W. Fred Axley

I agree that the evidence is sufficient to support the conviction and that, under the terms of the 1989 Sentencing Act, the trial court erred by applying enhancement factors (10), (11), and (17).  It is my view, however, that the ruling in Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. ___, 124 S. Ct. 2531 2004), precludes the application of enhancement factor (21) in this case.