Jennifer Norman v. Steven Norman
M2001-01281-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Muriel Robinson
This appeal is the culmination of a lengthy and bitter child support battle. When the parties were divorced in 1994 by the Law Court for Washington County, the wife was awarded custody of their child, and the husband was required to pay child support. The court also approved the parties' marital dissolution agreement that, among other things, provided for annual child support adjustments and obligated the husband to provide the wife with a copy of his annual federal income tax return. The case was transferred to the Circuit Court for Davidson County after the wife and child moved to Nashville. In November 1999, the mother requested the trial court to increase child support and to hold the husband in contempt for failing to provide her copies of his tax returns. Following a bench trial, the trial court not only increased the child support prospectively but also awarded the wife $19,026 in retroactive child support back to 1996. The husband asserts on this appeal that the trial court erred by awarding retroactive child support. We have determined that the trial court did not err by awarding child support back to 1996 because the wife had filed a motion to modify child support in 1996 that had never been acted upon. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment.

State of Tennessee v. Genore Dancy
W2001-02451-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Joseph B. Dailey

After a Shelby County Criminal Court jury found the defendant, Genore Dancy, guilty of four counts of aggravated rape, seven counts of especially aggravated kidnapping, five counts of aggravated robbery, and one count of aggravated burglary, the trial court merged the aggravated rape verdicts into two aggravated rape convictions, imposed the remaining convictions, and sentenced the defendant to an effective incarcerative term of 150 years. In his appeal, the defendant claims that his especially aggravated kidnapping convictions violate principles of due process, that the evidence in one of the aggravated rape counts was insufficient to support that conviction, that the trial court erred in failing to instruct the jury as to the lesser-included offense of facilitation, and that, in sentencing the defendant, the trial court erred in not applying a mitigating factor and in misapplying various enhancement factors. Discerning no reversible error, we affirm.

Bellsouth BSE v. Tennessee Reg. Authority
M2000-00868-COA-R12-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
BellSouth BSE, Inc. appeals from an order of the Tennessee Regulatory Authority denying BSE's application for certification as a competing local exchange company in those areas where BSE's affiliate, BellSouth Telecommunications, is the incumbent provider of local services. Because the TRA denied the petition on the basis that such certification may be inconsistent with the goal of fostering competition and could be potentially adverse to competition, as opposed to establishing conditions or requirements designed to ensure that anticompetitive practices did not occur, we vacate the order as beyond the agency's statutory authority.

Roscoe H. Woods v. State of Tennessee
E2001-01790-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge James B. Scott, Jr.

The petitioner appeals the denial of his petition for post conviction relief, arguing that the post-conviction court erred in finding that he received effective assistance of trial counsel. Based on our review, we conclude that the petitioner failed to meet his burden of demonstrating that his trial counsel provided ineffective assistance. Accordingly, we affirm the post-conviction court's denial of post-conviction relief.

State of Tennessee v. Joshua Aaron Roush
E2002-00313-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge Richard R. Baumgartner

The Appellant, Joshua Aaron Roush, appeals the sentencing decision of the Knox County Criminal Court. Roush pled guilty to attempted second degree murder and, following a hearing, was sentenced as a Range I offender to a term of eleven years in the Department of Correction. Roush appeals, asserting that his sentence was excessive because the trial court failed to comply with relevant sentencing principles and erred in not applying six mitigating factors. After a review of the record, we find that Roush's issue is without merit. Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.

This Case Arises Out of The Same Set of Facts As Carroll v. Whitney, 29 S.W.3D 14 (Tenn.
W2002-02105-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer

W2002-02322-COA-R3-CV
W2002-02322-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Martha B. Brasfield

Russell Gregory III vs. Mary Gregory
W2002-01049-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: D. J. Alissandratos
This appeal arises from a divorce and custody proceeding. The trial court found it to be in the best interest of the child that the father be granted primary custody of the parties' minor daughter. The primary issue on appeal is whether the trial court erred in applying the best interest analysis. For the following reasons, we affirm.

Joe R. Hales v. Shelby County, Tennessee
W2002-01539-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: D'Army Bailey

City of Oakland, Tennessee v. Lenita Mccraw,
W2002-01552-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: William H. Inman

State of Tennessee v. Betsy Dowdy
W2001-03104-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge James C. Beasley, Jr.

On September 20, 1999, the Defendant pled guilty to theft of property valued over $1000 and to attempted aggravated robbery. The trial court sentenced the Defendant to two years for the theft conviction and to six years for the aggravated robbery conviction. The trial court suspended both sentences and placed the Defendant on six years' probation. On June 24, 2001, the Defendant was arrested for theft of property valued over $500. Based on the arrest, the trial court revoked the Defendant's probation. The Defendant now appeals, arguing that the trial court erred by revoking her probation. Finding no error, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

In Matter of D.A.H.
W2002-00733-COA-R3-JV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Harold W. Horne
This is a termination of parental rights case. The father appeals from the order of the juvenile court terminating parental rights to his child. Specifically, the father asserts that the grounds for termination cited by the trial court are no longer applicable based on the Supreme Court's recent holding in Jones v. Garrett, 92 S.W.3d 385 (Tenn. 2002). Because we find a distinction between the instant case and Jones v. Garrett, we affirm the order of the trial court.

In Matter of D.A.H.
W2002-00733-COA-R3-JV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Harold W. Horne
This is a termination of parental rights case. The father appeals from the order of the juvenile court terminating parental rights to his child. Specifically, the father asserts that the grounds for termination cited by the trial court are no longer applicable based on the Supreme Court's recent holding in Jones v. Garrett, 92 S.W.3d 385 (Tenn. 2002). Because we find a distinction between the instant case and Jones v. Garrett, we affirm the order of the trial court.

Richard Humphrey v. Jeanetta Gammage
M2002-00507-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge L. Craig Johnson
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
This appeal arose after the trial court granted summary judgment for Jeanetta Gammage and Deborah Gammage against Richard Humphrey in his petition to establish paternity of Karenda Raines. Because the petitioner could not establish any issues of material facts as grounds to proceed with his petition, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Squeeky Clean v. David Harvey
M2002-00538-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge L. Craig Johnson
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Mccoy
This appeal arose after the trial court dismissed Squeeky Clean Laundries, Inc.'s action against David E. Harvey, et al. for failure to prosecute. Because there was no proof of a willful violation of a court order, we find that the trial court abused its discretion. We reverse the trial court's decision and remand.

State of Tennessee v. Paul Graham Manning
M2002-00547-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Judge Leon C. Burns, Jr.

The Defendant, Paul Graham Manning, was convicted by a jury of first degree premeditated murder and felony reckless endangerment. In this direct appeal, the Defendant raises six issues: (1) whether the evidence is sufficient to support his convictions; (2) whether the trial court properly instructed the jury on lesser-included offenses; (3) whether the trial court properly instructed the jury on the culpable mental state required for premeditated murder; (4) whether the Defendant was denied his constitutional right to a speedy trial; (5) whether the trial court erred by not reducing his bond; and (6) whether the trial court erred in quashing the Defendant's subpoena for certain witnesses. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

M2002-00560-COA-R3-CV
M2002-00560-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.

State of Tennessee v. Phillip Charles Saindon, Jr. and Jerry Sailors
M2001-01860-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge Seth W. Norman

The defendants, Phillip Charles Saindon, Jr. and Jerry Sailors, were each convicted of one count of theft over $10,000 and one count of theft over $60,000. In addition to challenging the sufficiency of the evidence on appeal, they argue that there was a fatal variance between the indictment and the proof and that the trial court erred in admitting hearsay evidence. We conclude there was no material or prejudicial variance between the indictment, which alleged theft of United States currency, and the proof as to each was sufficient to sustain the convictions of theft over $60,000. However, as to the convictions for theft over $10,000, we conclude that, although the State presented sufficient evidence to establish that the defendants committed theft of property, the evidence was insufficient to establish the value of the thefts for these convictions. Accordingly, we modify the convictions for theft over $10,000 to theft over $1000 and remand the case to the trial court for appropriate sentencing for this offense. We affirm the judgments of conviction for theft over $60,000.

State of Tennessee v. Richard Warren
M2001-02139-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Judge James K. Clayton, Jr.

The appellant, Richard Warren, pled guilty in the Rutherford County Circuit Court to two counts of aggravated sexual battery. The trial court sentenced the appellant on each offense to eleven years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the appellant contends that the trial court misapplied enhancement and mitigating factors in determining his sentences. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Amin Shabazz v. State of Tennessee
M2002-01302-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Judge Seth W. Norman

Petitioner, Amin Shabazz, filed a petition for post-conviction relief attacking his conviction for sale of a controlled substance containing more than 0.5 grams of cocaine, following a plea of nolo contendere in the Davidson County Criminal Court. He received a ten-year sentence. The conviction occurred on August 27, 2001, and the petition for post-conviction relief was timely filed on April 22, 2002. The trial court dismissed the petition without appointing counsel, without allowing Petitioner to amend the petition, and without an evidentiary hearing. On appeal, the Petitioner asserts that the trial court erred by summarily dismissing the petition. The State agrees. Following a review of the record, we reverse the judgment of the trial court, and remand this case for an evidentiary hearing and for the post-conviction trial court to further allow Petitioner to receive all procedural rights granted to him pursuant to the Post-Conviction Relief Act.

Ronnie Brown v. State
M2002-01361-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Claimants appeal the action of the Tennessee Claims Commission in dismissing their claims based upon the expiration of the statute of limitations. We affirm the action of the Claims Commission.

Myron Gentry, et al v. Hospital Housekeeping Systems of Houston, Inc.
M2002-01513-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Barbara N. Haynes
This appeal arose after the trial court granted summary judgment for Hospital Housekeeping Systems of Houston, Inc. on a suit brought by an employee of Centennial Medical Center who slipped and fell after stepping on wet carpet. Because a material factual dispute exists, we reverse the trial court's decision and remand.

State of Tennessee v. Brian Ernest Merriweather
M2002-01817-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Judge Michael R. Jones

Following a bench trial, Defendant, Brian Ernest Merriweather, was found guilty of the unlawful sale of more than 0.5 grams of cocaine. He was sentenced to serve fourteen years as a Range II multiple offender. In his sole issue on appeal, Defendant argues that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction, and that, at most, the State proved that he was guilty of a casual exchange of cocaine. After a review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Vicki B. Carlton v. Sharon L. Davis
M2002-01089-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Barbara N. Haynes
The trial court granted summary judgment to Appellee based upon expiration of the applicable statute of limitations. Appellant asserts that Tennessee Code Annotated section 56-7-1201(g) tolls the statute of limitations, or that, in the alternative, Appellee is equitably estopped from relying upon the statute of limitations. We affirm the action of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Corey Mickens, Christopher Smith, Matthew Dixon, and Choncey Jones
W1999-01169-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge Joseph B. Dailey

The defendants, Corey Mickens, Christopher Smith, Matthew Dixon, and Choncey Jones, all members of the Gangster Disciples, were indicted for various offenses as the result of the kidnapping of Marshall Shipp and Ricky Aldridge and subsequent beating of Aldridge and murder of Shipp, both of whom also were Gangster Disciples. Mickens was convicted of first degree murder in the perpetration of aggravated kidnapping and especially aggravated kidnapping of Shipp. Smith, Dixon, and Jones were convicted of first degree premeditated murder and especially aggravated kidnapping of Shipp, and all four defendants were convicted of the especially aggravated kidnapping of Aldridge. All four defendants were sentenced to life without the possibility of parole on the first degree murder charges. Additionally, Mickens was sentenced to two consecutive twenty-two-year sentences for the two especially aggravated kidnapping charges. Smith was sentenced to two consecutive forty-year sentences for the two especially aggravated kidnapping charges. Dixon was sentenced to two consecutive thirty-two-year, six month sentences for the two especially aggravated kidnapping charges. Jones was sentenced to two consecutive twenty-year sentences for the two especially aggravated kidnapping charges. On appeal, the defendants raise a number of issues, both jointly and individually. They argue that the trial court erred in denying the motions to sever, in its jury instructions, and in sentencing. Additionally, all argue that the evidence was insufficient to sustain their convictions. Jones and Mickens individually present several issues, including that the trial court erred in admitting into evidence an affidavit supposedly written by Jones, by allowing Jones's jail armband to be read to the jury, in allowing a State's witness to testify that Dixon flashed gang signs during her testimony, and in certain rulings regarding the State's closing argument. Smith argues that the trial court excused a juror without cause. Following our review, we affirm the convictions and sentences as to each defendant.