State of Tennessee v. Howard C. Covington in re: Memphis Bonding Company
W2001-01575-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Carolyn Wade Blackett

Memphis Bonding Company appeals the Shelby County Criminal Court's order denying its petitions for exoneration of liability for the defendant Howard C. Covington's bail bonds for various offenses. Because the record fails to reflect that this case is properly before us as a rightful appeal, we dismiss the appeal.

State of Tennessee v. Larry Douglas
E2001-01945-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge Rebecca J. Stern

After failing to report to his arrest house and failing a drug screen, defendant's sentence in the Community Corrections Program was revoked, and defendant appealed the revocation. The record contains substantial evidence to support the revocation. We affirm the judgment.

State of Tennessee v. Mark Walker
M2001-00341-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge Carol L. Soloman

The defendant was convicted of one count of theft of property, one count of aggravated assault, two counts of criminal simulation, one count of evading arrest, and one count of possession of drug paraphernalia. The criminal simulation convictions were merged by the trial court, and the defendant was sentenced as follows: four years for theft of property, four years for criminal simulation, ten years for aggravated assault, and eleven months and twenty nine days for both evading arrest and possession of drug paraphernalia. On appeal, the defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his convictions for theft, criminal simulation, and evading arrest. He also alleges that the trial court failed to exclude from evidence hearsay testimony and statements to law enforcement in violation of his Fifth Amendment rights. Further, the defendant asserts that the trial court erred by failing to instruct the jury on the lesser-included offense of attempted criminal simulation. Finally, the defendant challenges the length and manner of service of his sentences. After a review of the record, we reverse and dismiss the defendant's conviction of criminal simulation. The remaining judgments of the trial court are affirmed.

State of Tennessee v. Clyde Randall Scivally
M2001-02261-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Judge J. Curtis Smith
The defendant and co-defendant were indicted for possession of over .5 grams of cocaine with intent to sell and possession of drug paraphernalia. A Franklin County jury convicted the defendant of the lesser-included offense of simple possession of cocaine and acquitted him of possession of drug paraphernalia. The co-defendant was convicted of both indicted offenses. In this appeal, the defendant contends the evidence was insufficient to sustain his conviction. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Robert Powell, Jr. v. Blalock Plumbing
M2001-00204-WC-WCM-CV
Trial Court Judge: Jeffrey F. Stewart

Robert Powell, Jr. v. Blalock Plumbing
M2001-00204-WC-WCM-CV
Trial Court Judge: Jeffrey F. Stewart

Robert Powell, Jr. v. Blalock Plumbing
M2001-00204-WC-WCM-CV
Trial Court Judge: Jeffrey F. Stewart

Robert Marengo & Francine Marengo v. Terry Bowen
M2000-02379-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Don R. Ash
Trial Court Judge: Vernon Neal
This is an appeal from the judgment of the Chancellor regarding the judicial dissolution of a continuing partnership. The trial court determined the withdrawing partner's debt should not be offset against his capital account in assessing his dissolution date value until the valuation of the business was made by the court, it was proper to add an additional $20,000 as a going concern adjustment to the valuation of the partnership, certain salary adjustments were proper, and a marketability and/or minority discount does not apply to the partnership. This Court concluded the trial court's determination offsetting the withdrawing partner's debt to the partnership as of the trial date was proper, the trial court erred in adding an additional $20,000 as a going concern value to the valuation of the partnership, the trial court's salary adjustment was proper, the trial court's refusal to apply a minority and/or marketability discount was proper, and the trial court's adjustment for a portion of the partnership's legal and professional expenses was proper. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for recalculation of the value of the withdrawing partner's interest as consistent with this order. Costs of this appeal shall be split between the appellant and the appellee.

In Re: The Estate of Lonzo Kelley
M2001-00847-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Michael R. Jones
Lonzo Kelley operated a grocery store and borrowed a total of $250,000 from Heritage Bank ("Defendant") to operate the store. After Mr. Kelley died and there was no person or entity willing to assume control of the store, Defendant assumed operation of the store with the stated intent of protecting the assets, some of which were perishable. Defendant also believed the store would be more valuable at the time of foreclosure if it continued to remain open up until the time of sale. Defendant purchased new inventory and continued to operate the store until foreclosure took place. After foreclosure, and after deducting all expenses, etc., approximately $3,874.88 remained, which Defendant kept on deposit. Several years later, The Estate of Lonzo H. Kelley ("Plaintiff") filed suit making numerous challenges to Defendant's accounting practices, the manner in which Defendant operated the store, as well as its legal right to assume control of the store. Both parties filed motions for summary judgment. The Trial Court granted judgment to Plaintiff in the amount of $9,132.09, but determined Defendant was within its rights to assume control of the store and had not engaged in any wrongful acts while operating the store. Plaintiff appeals. We affirm.

Alfred Akin v. Kylan Thompson
M2001-00851-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert L. Jones
Trial Court Judge: Thomas W. Brothers
The plaintiff Alfred Akin was rear-ended by a vehicle driven by the defendant Kylan Thompson, who was uninsured. The Allstate Insurance policy on the Akin vehicle provided uninsured motorist coverage with limits of $100,000 per person and $300,000 per occurrence. Though in his personal vehicle, Mr. Akin was in the course and scope of his employment with the Metropolitan Nashville Water Works when injured. Metro government does not have a workers' compensation program, but has a benefit program for on-the-job injuries, under which it paid more than $100,000 for medical bills and disability benefits. The trial court held that Allstate's limits were reduced by amounts paid "under any workers' compensation law, disability law, or similar law . . . ." and also found that the loss of consortium claim of Mrs. Akin was derivative in nature and subject to the same $100,000 "each person" limit and reduction. We affirm the trial court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Allstate.

Travis Jones, Jr. v. State of Tennessee
M2001-01852-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge J. Randall Wyatt, Jr.

The Appellant, Travis Jones, Jr., appeals from the dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. On March 22, 2000, Jones, pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, entered "best interest" pleas to two counts of second degree murder. As provided by the plea agreement, Jones was sentenced by the Davidson County Criminal Court to consecutive fifteen-year terms for each conviction. On appeal, Jones challenges the post-conviction court's dismissal of his petition, arguing that he was "forced" into pleading guilty due to trial counsel's inadequate pre-trial preparation. Finding no error, the judgment of the post-conviction court is affirmed.

Mary Kelley v. Mahlon Johns
M1998-00912-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Robert L. Jones
This appeal involves an intra-family dispute over the validity of an 88-year-old decedent's will leaving his farm to one of his nine children. After the will was admitted to probate in the Maury County Probate Court, six of the decedent's children filed suit in the Circuit Court for Maury County asserting that their father lacked testamentary capacity when he executed the will and that the will had been procured by undue influence by the child who received the farm. A jury determined that a confidential relationship existed between the decedent and his son when the disputed will was executed and that the will was procured by undue influence. Accordingly, the trial court entered an order invalidating the will and setting aside the pending probate proceeding. On this appeal, the child who received the farm from his father insists that the evidence does not support the jury's findings that he had a confidential relationship with his father and that he exerted undue influence over his father with regard to the substance of the will. We have determined that the record contains material evidence to support the jury's verdict and, therefore, affirm the judgment.

State of Tennessee v. William J. Ford
W2000-01205-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith
Trial Court Judge: Judge Chris B. Craft

A Shelby County grand jury indicted the defendant for first degree murder, and the State elected to seek the death penalty in this case. Following the guilt phase of the defendant's bifurcated trial, the trial jury convicted him as charged. At the close of the sentencing phase, the trial jury further found that the evidence supported the existence of the alleged aggravating factor but concluded that this factor did not outweigh the mitigating factors. The jury, therefore, sentenced the defendant to serve a life term without the possibility of parole. Subsequently, the defendant filed a new trial motion which the trial court denied. On appeal, the defendant contends (1) that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction; (2) that the trial court erred in barring him from the courtroom because of his outbursts in the jury's presence; (3) that the trial court erred in not declaring a mistrial after deciding that the defendant could not be present at his trial because of these outbursts; (4) that the trial court erred in admitting three letters written by the defendant; and (5) that the prosecution, in its closing argument, impermissibly shifted the burden of proof to the defense by commenting on a witness mentioned by the defense in its opening statement but not called to testify at trial. Upon reviewing these issues, we find that none merit relief and, therefore, affirm the defendant's conviction.

State of Tennessee v. Randy B. Long
W2001-01467-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge Roger A. Page

A Madison County deputy jailer saw a plastic bag of 2.5 grams of cocaine fall from the defendant's crotch area as he removed his clothing for a strip search after his arrest for possession of marijuana and drug paraphernalia. The defendant was subsequently convicted of possession of more than .5 grams of cocaine with the intent to sell or deliver, a Class B felony, and the introduction of contraband into a penal institution, a Class C felony. He argues on appeal that he cannot be convicted of introduction of contraband into a penal institution when his entrance into the jail was involuntary, and that the evidence was not sufficient to support his convictions. Based on our review of the record and of applicable law, we conclude that a voluntary entrance into a penal institution is not a requirement of the offense, and that the evidence was more than sufficient to support the defendant's convictions in this case. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Timothy Roberson v. State of Tennessee
W2001-00549-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge L. Terry Lafferty

The petitioner, Timothy Roberson, was convicted in 1995 of first degree murder and especially aggravated robbery, receiving respective sentences, to be served consecutively, of life without parole and fifteen years as a Range I, standard offender. Following an unsuccessful direct appeal of his conviction, he filed a petition for post-conviction relief, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel at trial. The post-conviction court dismissed the petition following a hearing, and the petitioner timely appealed. We affirm the order denying the petition.

State of Tennessee v. George W. Lucas
W2001-02600-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith
Trial Court Judge: Judge James C. Beasley, Jr.

The defendant pled guilty to the offense of carjacking and was sentenced to 7.2 years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. In this appeal he claims that he was improperly denied probation because the trial judge mistakenly held that individuals convicted of carjacking were statutorily ineligible for probation. We hold that the legislature has allowed individuals convicted of carjacking and sentenced to eight (8) years or less to remain eligible for probation. Moreover, the trial judge also erred in determining that the use of a weapon in a carjacking was, standing alone, sufficient reason to deny the defendant probation. We therefore reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand for re-sentencing in accordance with this opinion.

State of Tennessee v. John Earl Turner, alias
E2001-01373-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Judge Ray L. Jenkins

The Defendant, John Earl Turner, appeals as of right from the judgment of the trial court, which found him to be in violation of the terms of the probation he was serving for two separate, non-related convictions. After a hearing, the trial judge ordered the Defendant incarcerated for the balance of the sentences, which were being served consecutively to each other. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

John Ramsey v. First Tennessee Bank
E2001-01777-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Howell N. Peoples, Special Judge
Trial Court Judge: L W. Dale Young, Judge
The employee appeals a finding that his hernia was not compensable. We affirm.

P.E.K. v. J.M. and C.Y.M.
M2001-02190-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Jim T. Hamilton
This case, before this Court for the second time, involves an interstate battle between never-married parents over custody of a minor daughter. The trial court found that under the provisions of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction and Enforcement Act (UCCJEA), the trial court had jurisdiction of the custody dispute and entered judgment awarding custody of the minor daughter to the Petitioner-Father. Mother has appealed. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.

Marchella Richardson v. Terry Stacey
M2001-02167-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Robert E. Corlew, III
Plaintiff, landowner, sued defendant, adjoining landowner, to enjoin him from trespassing on her land, committing a nuisance, and for damages. Plaintiff secured a temporary restraining order, and after a nonjury trial, plaintiff was granted injunctive relief in several particulars and was awarded compensatory and punitive damages. Defendant appeals. We modify in part and affirm as modified.

Patricia Grice v. Larry Grice
M2001-02105-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Leonard W. Martin
This appeal arises from a divorce proceeding initiated by the wife. The trial court, holding that both parties contributed to the demise of the marriage, granted the parties a divorce. The trial court then granted the wife rehabilitative alimony for a period of eighteen months, as well as alimony in solido, but denied the wife's request for alimony in futuro. The primary issue on appeal is whether the trial court erred in granting the wife rehabilitative alimony as opposed to alimony in futuro. For the following reasons, we affirm, as modified.

Joseph Meadors v. Sonya Danielle Shrum
M2001-02691-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: C. L. Rogers
This case involves a petition to modify visitation. The mother and father were divorced in January 1999. By agreement, the mother was granted custody of the parties' minor child, and the father was given visitation. The divorce decree provided that the father's visitation schedule would change from week to week depending on father's fluctuating work schedule in his job as an emergency medical technician. This schedule necessitated repeated negotiating between the mother and the father to agree on the father's visitation schedule. In April 2001, the father petitioned the court for "standard" every-other-weekend visitation, without regard to his work schedule, in order to end the parties' pattern of negotiating and bickering. The trial court determined that the parties were unable to work together amicably, and ordered "standard" every-other-weekend visitation in order to minimize the interaction between the parties. The mother now appeals. We affirm, finding that the parties' inability to implement amicably the ordered visitation arrangement constituted a sufficient change in circumstances to warrant the slight modification in visitation.

David Anthony Norman v. Melissa Dawn Norman
M2001-02796-COA-R3-CV-
Trial Court Judge: Russell Heldman

State of Tennessee v. Gerald E. Saylor
E2001-00604-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Judge Lynn W. Brown

The defendant, Gerald E. Saylor, was convicted by a Washington County Criminal Court jury of voluntary manslaughter, a Class C felony, and the trial court sentenced him as a Range III, persistent offender to fifteen years imprisonment. The defendant appeals, claiming that: (1) the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction; (2) the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress his confession; (3) the trial court erred in excluding testimony that several hours before the killing the victim had stated to a third party that he was going to kill the defendant; (4) the trial court erred in excluding testimony to rebut the state's inference that the defendant planted weapons on the victim and that the victim had made prior threats to the defendant; (5) the trial court erred by failing to declare a mistrial when the jury heard references to his being "on parole" and "on the run"; and (6) the trial court erred in its application of enhancement and mitigating factors to his sentence. Although we conclude that enhancement factor (5) regarding exceptional cruelty should not have been applied, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

John Paul Seals v. State of Tennessee
E2001-01756-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Judge James E. Beckner

The petitioner, John Paul Seals, appeals as of right the Hamblen County Criminal Court's denial of his petition for post-conviction relief, which the court deemed to be filed outside of the statute of limitations. He contends that the trial court should have granted his motion for the appointment of an additional psychological expert in order that he might prove that his mental incompetence tolled the statute of limitations. We affirm the trial court's denial of the petition.