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

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

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

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.

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

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 Specifically, the father asserts that the grounds for termination cited by the trial court are no longer applicable based on the Supreme Court's recent holding in Jones v. Garrett, 92 S.W.3d 385 (Tenn. 2002).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 Specifically, the father asserts that the grounds for termination cited by the trial court are no longer applicable based on the Supreme Court's recent holding in Jones v. Garrett, 92 S.W.3d 385 (Tenn. 2002).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.

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.

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.

Dale Pratt v. Averitt Express, Inc.
E2002-00864-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Howell N. Peoples, Special Judge
Trial Court Judge: Daryl Fansler, Chancellor
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e) for hearing and reporting of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The employer appeals the trial court's refusal to cap the employee's award at two and one-half times the employee's medical impairment as provided by Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-241(a)(1). We modify the judgment of the trial court. Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e) (1999) Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Knox County Chancery Court is Modified. HOWELL N. PEOPLES, SP. J., in which WILLIAM M. BARKER, JUSTICE, and JOHN K. BYERS, SR. J., joined. Andrew R. Tillman, LLP, Paine, Tarwater, Bickers and Tillman, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the Appellant, Averitt Express, Inc. Richard Baker, Baker, Gulley & Oldham, P.A., Knoxville, Tennessee, for the Appellee, Dale Pratt. MEMORANDUM OPINION Facts On October 27, 1999, Dale Pratt sustained a back injury in the course and scope of his employment with Averitt Express, Inc. ("Averitt"). His treating physician assigned a permanent medical impairment of seven percent to the body as a whole. At the time of the injury, Pratt was working as a truck driver and was paid $17.1 per hour for both regular and overtime hours he 1 worked. Following the injury, medical restrictions prevented his return to work as a truck driver. Averitt trained him to be a dispatcher and retained him at a salary of $725 for a 4-hour week, the equivalent of $18.12 per hour and paid him overtime at the rate of $9.6 per hour. Mr. Pratt continued to work approximately the same amount of overtime as he had worked before the injury. Pay records introduced at the trial established that because of the difference in overtime pay per hour, the actual average weekly compensation received by Mr. Pratt before the injury was greater than that received after he returned to work in the new position. The trial court held that Mr. Pratt had "not returned to the same wage because he was earning less on an average weekly basis than he did prior to the injury; that the two and a half times under 241 (did) not apply; and that he is entitled to a permanent and partial disability to the body as a whole at three and half times seven percent for a rating twenty-four and half percent to the body as a whole in this case." Standard of Review Review of the findings of fact made by the trial court is de novo upon the record of the trial court, accompanied by a presumption of the correctness of the findings, unless the preponderance of the evidence is otherwise Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e)(2); Tucker v. Foamex, L.P., 31 S.W.3d 241, 242 (Tenn. 2). The application of this standard requires this Court to weigh in more depth the factual findings and conclusions of the trial courts in workers' compensation cases. Corcoran v. Foster Auto GMC, Inc., 746 S.W.2d 452 456 (Tenn. 1988). Conclusions of law are subject to de novo review with no presumption of correctness. Ganzevoort v. Russell, 949 S.W.2d 293 (Tenn. 1997). Issue The issue is whether the trial court erred in failing to apply the statutory cap of two and one-half times the employee's medical impairment pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6- 241(a)(1). Discussion At the time of the trial of this case, the Tennessee Supreme Court had decided the case of Wilkins v. Kellogg Co., 48 S.W.3d 148 (Tenn. 21) relating to an award of temporary partial disability and holding that the term "wage" as used in Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6- 27(2) referred to the amount paid to an injured employee by an employer on an hourly basis. The Supreme Court, with two members dissenting, distinguished the term "wage" as used in Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6- 27(2) from the term "average weekly wage" used in other portions of the Worker's Compensation Act. In Wilkins, the Court noted that "average weekly wage" includes such compensation as overtime, bonuses and commissions. It held that the term "wage" as used in Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-27(2) did not permit the inclusion of overtime in determining the amount of temporary partial benefits to be paid to an injured employee. Ms. Wilkins normally worked 6 hours each week and was paid at the rate of $21.52 per hour for 4 hours and a higher 2

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

State of Tennessee v. Lawrence Taylor
W2002-00183-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Judge Joseph H. Walker, III

A Tipton County jury convicted the defendant of the delivery of .5 grams or more of cocaine. On appeal, he argues: (1) the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction; (2) the trial court erred in refusing to grant a mistrial after the prosecutor improperly questioned the defendant about prior drug sales; and (3) the trial court erroneously instructed the jury regarding his co-defendant's status as an accomplice. We conclude the trial court erred in refusing to grant a mistrial. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand the matter for a new trial.

State of Tennessee v. Jerry Steven Cothran and Lee Theodore Smith
W2002-00485-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Judge Joseph H. Walker, III

A Lauderdale County grand jury indicted the defendants, Jerry Steven Cothran and Lee Theodore Smith, on one count of attempt to manufacture a controlled substance, two counts of possession of controlled substances, and one count of possession of drug paraphernalia. Cothran was also indicted on three counts of unlawful possession of a firearm. The trial court granted the defendants' motion to suppress evidence based upon an illegal search. On appeal, the state contends the trial court erred in granting the defendants' motion to suppress. Upon review of the record and the applicable law, we reverse the judgment of the trial court.