Opinions

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.

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. 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.

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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

State of Tennessee v. Vernon Lamar Bryant
E2002-01234-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge Douglas A. Meyer

Following a jury trial, the defendant was found guilty of attempted reckless homicide, aggravated burglary, and aggravated assault. The trial court merged the attempted reckless homicide conviction into the aggravated assault conviction, and the defendant was sentenced as a Range II, multiple offender, to ten years for aggravated assault and six years for aggravated burglary, with the sentences to run concurrently. The defendant contends that the trial court improperly merged the attempted reckless homicide conviction into his aggravated assault conviction. Also, the trial court erred in instructing the jury on flight. We conclude, following plain error review, that attempted reckless homicide is not a recognized crime in Tennessee. We reverse and dismiss the defendant's conviction for attempted reckless homicide. Further, we conclude that the jury instruction regarding flight was not error, and the trial court correctly sentenced the defendant as a Range II, multiple offender. We affirm the defendant's convictions and sentences for aggravated burglary and aggravated assault.

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.

State v. Jerry Davidson
M1998-00105-SC-DDT-DD
Authoring Judge: Justice Janice M. Holder
Trial Court Judge: Allen W. Wallace

State v. Jerry Davidson
M1998-00105-SC-DDT-DD
Authoring Judge: Justice Janice M. Holder
Trial Court Judge: Allen W. Wallace

State v. Jerry Davidson
M1998-00105-SC-DDT-DD
Authoring Judge: Justice Janice M. Holder
Trial Court Judge: Allen W. Wallace

Dept. of Children's Services vs. K.G., et al In re: K.L.H.
E2003-00437-COA-R3-PT
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Suzanne Bailey
The State of Tennessee, Department of Children's Services ("DCS") filed a petition seeking to terminate the parental rights of K.G. ("Mother"), and F.L.H., Jr. ("Father"), the biological parents of the minor child, K.L.H. ("the Child"). The trial court granted DCS' petition to terminate first Father's, and later Mother's, parental rights. Mother appeals. We vacate the order terminating Mother's parental rights and remand for a new termination decision.

Ed Netherland, et al v. Bill Hunter, et al
M2002-03094-COA-R9-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Walter C. Kurtz
In this matter we are asked to determine which statute controls the issue of venue for a claim filed under the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act, the venue provision of that act, Tennessee Code Annotated section 47-18-109, or Tennessee's general venue provision, section 20-4-101 of the Code. The trial court determined that section 47-18-109 controls venue in this action and denied Defendants' Motion to Dismiss for Improper Venue. We affirm the decision of the trial court.

In the Matter of D.L.B., A Minor
W2001-02245-SC-R11-CV
Authoring Judge: Justice Janice M. Holder
Trial Court Judge: Chancellor Kenny W. Armstrong

This appeal involves an action to terminate parental rights filed by the prospective adoptive parents of a child. The child’s father asserts that the chancery court erred in terminating his parental rights on the basis that he abandoned his child for the four-month period set forth in Tennessee Code Annotated section 36-1-102(1)(A)(i). To compute the four-month period, the chancery court used the date on which the Court Appointed Special Advocate (“CASA”) filed a petition in juvenile court to terminate the father’s parental rights. CASA’s petition was later dismissed. The Court of Appeals affirmed the chancery court’s termination of parental rights under Tennessee Code Annotated section 36-1-102(1)(A)(i) and found an additional ground for abandonment as defined by Tennessee Code Annotated section 36-1-102(1)(A)(iii). Tennessee Code Annotated section 36-1-102(1)(A)(iii) specifies that parental rights may be terminated if the father “willfully failed to make reasonable payments toward the support of the child’s mother during the four (4) months immediately preceding the birth of the child.” We granted permission to appeal. We hold that the commencement of the four-month period of abandonment under Tennessee Code Annotated section 36-1-102(1)(A)(i) is properly computed from the date on which the petition to terminate parental rights was filed in chancery court, not from the filing date of the earlier juvenile court petition. We further hold that the Court of Appeals erred in terminating the father’s parental rights based upon Tennessee Code Annotated section 36-1-102(1)(A)(iii). Accordingly, we reverse the Court of Appeals and remand this case to the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Mona Ray Cloud alias Mona R. Headrick, alias Mona R. Cloud, alias Mona Headrick
E2002-03002-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Judge D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.

The defendant, Mona Ray Cloud, pled guilty in the Blount County Circuit Court to aggravated burglary, a Class C felony; violating the Motor Vehicle Habitual Offender (MVHO) Act, a Class E felony; and criminal impersonation, a Class A misdemeanor. Pursuant to the plea agreement, she received four-year, one-year, and six-month sentences, respectively, with the one-year and six-month sentences to be served concurrently to each other but consecutively to the four-year sentence for an effective sentence of five years in the Department of Correction (DOC). The manner of service was to be determined by the trial court. After a sentencing hearing, the trial court ordered the defendant to serve her sentences in confinement. The defendant appeals, claiming that she should have received alternative sentences. We affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Department of Children's services vs. R.A.W.
E2003-00847-COA-R3-PT
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Trial Court Judge: Thomas J. Wright
R.A.W. ("Father") challenges the termination of his parental rights, claiming there was insufficient proof to establish grounds for termination or that it was in the best interest of the child to terminate the parent-child relationship. Father also claims the Juvenile Court erred when it refused to grant him visitation after the petition to terminate his parental rights had been filed. We affirm the decision of the Juvenile Court.

LLoyd Williams vs. State
E2003-01409-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David Michael Swiney
Lloyd E. Williams ("Plaintiff"), who absconded while on bond, was tried, convicted, and sentenced on drug charges in absentia. Years later, Plaintiff was apprehended and placed in prison. Plaintiff sued the State of Tennessee ("the State") claiming that the trial and sentencing violated various statutory rights of his. The State filed a motion to dismiss. The Claims Commission ("the Commission") granted the State's motion to dismiss. Plaintiff appeals. We affirm.

Ronald Loines vs. Kimberly Loines
E2003-00526-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Samuel H. Payne
In this divorce case, the trial court awarded Ronald Keith Loines, Jr. ("Husband") a divorce from Kimberly Loines ("Wife") by judgment entered January 14, 2003. Wife filed her notice of appeal on February 25, 2003. Because the notice of appeal was not filed within 30 days of the entry of the judgment of divorce, we are without jurisdiction to consider the issues raised by Wife. Accordingly, Wife's appeal is dismissed.

E2003-00501-COA-R3-JV
E2003-00501-COA-R3-JV
Authoring Judge: Judge Charles D. Susano, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Suzanne Bailey

Children's Services, vs. SJMW, In The Matter of: DJL
E2003-00519-COA-R3-PT
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Suzanne Bailey
The mother's parental rights were terminated by the Trial Judge. Mother has appealed. We affirm.

Bobby Joe Carter v. State of Tennessee
M2002-02802-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith
Trial Court Judge: Judge W. Charles Lee

The appellant, serving an effective twenty-year sentence on three counts of especially aggravated kidnapping, argues the trial court erred in denying his petition for post-conviction relief because: (1) his guilty plea was not entered voluntarily and intelligently; and (2) his trial counsel was ineffective. We affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

State of Tennessee v. Barry Inman
M2002-02463-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Judge Timothy L. Easter

The appellant, Barry Inman, was convicted by a jury in the Williamson County Circuit Court of possession of over .5 grams of cocaine with the intent to sell or deliver, possession of Alprazolam with the intent to sell or deliver, possession of marijuana, possession of drug paraphernalia, and speeding. Additionally, the appellant pled guilty to driving on a revoked license. The trial court sentenced the appellant to a total effective sentence of nine years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the appellant contends that the trial court should have granted his motion for judgments of acquittal and that the evidence adduced at trial was insufficient to sustain his convictions. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.