Jerry Britt v. State of Tennessee
E2001-00864-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Judge James Edward Beckner

The Petitioner was charged with one count of aggravated sexual battery; five counts of rape of a child; two counts of possession with intent to sell or deliver a controlled substance; and six counts of the delivery of a controlled substance. The Petitioner subsequently pled guilty to two counts of possession with intent to sell or deliver a controlled substance and to six counts of the delivery of a controlled substance. He also entered an Alford plea to three counts of attempted rape of a child. Pursuant to his plea agreement, the trial court sentenced the Petitioner to an effective sentence of forty-eight years. The Petitioner subsequently filed a timely petition for post-conviction relief which was heard and denied by the trial court. In this post-conviction appeal, the Petitioner contends that he received ineffective assistance of counsel when he entered his pleas; that his counsel's deficient performance rendered his guilty pleas unknowing and involuntary; and that he should be granted post-conviction relief because of newly discovered evidence. Concluding that the Petitioner received adequate representation when he entered his plea; that his pleas were entered knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently; and that the Petitioner is not entitled to post-conviction relief on the basis of newly discovered evidence, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Melissa D. Hayman
E2001-01600-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Judge D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.

A jury convicted the Defendant, Melissa D. Hayman, of aggravated burglary, aggravated assault, and aggravated kidnapping. The trial court sentenced the Defendant as a Range I standard offender to six years each for the burglary and the assault convictions, and to twelve years as a Range I violent offender for the kidnapping. The six year sentences were ordered to be served consecutively to the twelve year sentence and to each other, for an effective sentence of twenty-four years. All of the Defendant's sentences were ordered to be served in the Department of Correction. In this direct appeal the Defendant contends that the kidnapping conviction violates her constitutional rights under State v. Anthony, and further challenges the length and manner of service of her sentences. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Joseph Lantrip
W2001-01552-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge W. Fred Axley

Defendant pled guilty to aggravated rape and aggravated kidnapping. On appeal, defendant (1) asserts that the trial court erred in its application of enhancement factors to the sentences and (2) asserts that the imposition of consecutive sentences was improper. After reviewing the sentence de novo, we conclude that the trial court erred in sentencing defendant. We reverse and remand for resentencing.

State of Tennessee v. Jeremy White
W2001-02580-CCA-R9-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Judge Arthur T. Bennett
On May 2, 2000, a Shelby County Grand Jury indicted the appellant, Jeremy White, for attempt to commit first degree murder, especially aggravated robbery, especially aggravated burglary, and especially aggravated kidnapping. The appellant retained an attorney, Mark McDaniel, to defend him against the State's prosecution in the Shelby County Criminal Court. However, in addition to maintaining a private practice, McDaniel was a "part-time prosecutor" for the Town of Collierville in Shelby County. Accordingly, the State filed a motion to disqualify McDaniel from representing the appellant due to a conflict of interest. Following a hearing, the trial court granted the State's motion. From the trial court's order, the appellant now brings this interlocutory appeal. Having thoroughly reviewed the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Freddie Dean Bledsoe
E2001-02085-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith
Trial Court Judge: Judge Lillie Ann Sells

The appellant was convicted by a jury of the offense of aggravated assault. He was sentenced to a term of six years incarceration and the jury assessed a $10,000 fine. On appeal he contends that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict. After a careful review of the record we find that the evidence is sufficient to support the verdict and we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Evangeline Combs and Joseph D. Combs
E2000-02801-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Judge R. Jerry Beck

 The Defendants, Joseph D. Combs and Evangeline Combs (husband and wife), were charged by presentment returned by a Sullivan County grand jury with numerous offenses: Joseph Combs was indicted for one count of especially aggravated kidnapping, two counts of aggravated assault, one count of aggravated perjury, one count of aggravated rape, and seven counts of rape. Evangeline Combs was indicted for one count of especially aggravated kidnapping, three counts  of aggravated assault, two counts of assault, and four counts of aggravated child abuse. Following the close of all proof, the trial court dismissed one count of aggravated assault in the presentment against both Defendants and three counts (one for aggravated assault and two for simple assault) against Evangeline, finding the offenses in these four counts were barred by the statute of limitations.  Following deliberation, the jury found Defendant Evangeline Combs guilty of especially aggravated kidnapping and four counts of aggravated child abuse, and not guilty of one count of aggravated assault. Defendant Joseph Combs was found guilty of especially aggravated kidnapping, aggravated assault, aggravated perjury, and aggravated rape, in addition to seven counts of rape. Evangeline Combs received a sentence of 65 years, and Joseph Combs received an effective sentence of 114 years. The Defendants, represented by different counsel, filed separate notices of appeal. Thereafter, the two cases were consolidated to form the instant appeal which presents the following issues: (1) whether the trial court properly conducted voir dire proceedings; (2) whether the trial court erred by allowing the State to amend the presentment for especially aggravated kidnapping; (3) whether the State properly complied with Defendants’ request for a bill of particulars regarding the charge of especially aggravated kidnapping; (4) whether the trial court improperly admitted evidence of prior bad acts; (5) whether the evidence was sufficient to support the Defendants’ convictions; (6) whether the trial court’s instructions to the jury included all appropriate lesser-included offenses; (7) whether the trial court failed to fully and properly instruct the jury concerning the especially aggravated kidnapping charge; (8) whether the trial court erred by failing  to merge the convictions for certain offenses; and (9) whether the sentences imposed on both Defendants were proper. Defendant Joseph Combs additionally presents the issue of whether seven of his  eight rape convictions should be reversed because the State failed to allege sufficient facts in the presentment to properly toll the statute of limitations for these offenses. After a thorough review of the record, we reverse Defendant Joseph Combs’ conviction for aggravated perjury and remand the matter for a new trial on that charge. In all other respects, we affirm the judgments of the trial court as modified.

State of Tennessee v. Joseph and Evangeline Combs - Concurring
E2000-2801-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Gary R. Wade
Trial Court Judge: Judge R. Jerry Beck

While I concur in the results reached by the majority, it is my view that the failure to charge the lesser included offenses of facilitation of especially aggravated kidnapping and false imprisonment on the charge of especially aggravated kidnapping and reckless endangerment and assault on the charge of aggravated assault was, in fact, error. The majority implies that but does not so assert. I also believe that the error is harmless beyond a reasonable doubt as to each of those convictions. Most recently, in State v. Allen, 69 S.W.3d 181, 189 (Tenn. 2002), our supreme court established that a contextual analysis of the entire record was necessary in order to determine whether the failure to charge a lesser included offense qualified as harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. In my opinion, the Allen ruling negates any implication in State v. Williams, 977 S.W.2d 101, 106 (Tenn. 1998), that the failure to instruct on lesser included offenses will always be harmless when the jury returns a verdict two levels in excess of an omitted lesser included offense.

State of Tennessee v. Tyler Ward Enix
E2001-03111-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: Judge D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.

The defendant, Tyler Ward Enix, appeals from the Blount County Circuit Court's revoking his probation that was ordered for his sentences for harassing and stalking his estranged wife. The defendant contends that although he violated his probation, the trial court erred in sentencing him to confinement. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Nelson Keith Foster
E2002-00323-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Judge R. Jerry Beck

The Defendant, Nelson Keith Foster, pled guilty to and was convicted of violating a motor vehicle habitual offender order. The Defendant was subsequently sentenced to three years, to be served on probation. The Defendant appealed to this Court from the trial court's denial of his motion to withdraw his guilty plea. See State v. Nelson Keith Foster, No. E2001-01259-CCA-R3-CD, 2002 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 172 (Knoxville, Mar. 7, 2002). Pending the Defendant's appeal, he twice violated the terms of his probation. Still pending the outcome of the Defendant's appeal, the trial court revoked the Defendant's probation. The Defendant now appeals the trial court's revocation of his probation. We reverse the trial court's order revoking the Defendant's probation and remand this matter for further proceedings.

Matthew Poliak v. James Adcock
M2000-02325-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Barbara N. Haynes
This appeal involves a dispute between a father and his adult daughter's live-in boyfriend. The boyfriend filed a personal injury suit against his girlfriend's father in the Circuit Court for Davidson County after the father assaulted him with a piece of two-by-four. The father admitted that he had assaulted his daughter's boyfriend but asserted the defenses of self-defense, provocation, and defense of property. In response to the boyfriend's motion for partial summary judgment, the trial court determined that the father had failed to produce evidence to substantiate any of these defenses. The father perfected this appeal after the trial court certified its order as final in accordance with Tenn. R. Civ. P. 54.02. We have determined that the trial court was correct when it determined that the father's evidence regarding the circumstances surrounding the assault could not, as a matter of law, support his affirmative defenses. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Adrian Patterson
M2001-01991-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge John H. Gasaway, III

The Appellant, Adrian Patterson, appeals the decision of the Montgomery County Circuit Court revoking his two community corrections sentences and resentencing him to the Department of Correction. On appeal, Patterson argues: (1) that his sentences were actually sentences of probation rather than community corrections and, as such, the trial court was without authority to enlarge his sentences; (2) that the evidence was insufficient to support two of the alleged violations of his Community Corrections Behavioral Contract; and (3) that allowing a cooperating individual to testify about Patterson’s drug activity in a pending federal drug case impaired his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination at the revocation proceeding. Finding no merit to Patterson’s claims, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Issac Earl Edgin v. State of Tennessee
M2001-02667-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge L. Terry Lafferty
Trial Court Judge: Judge John H. Gasaway, III

Petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief, claiming: (1) the trial judge, at petitioner's original trial, should have recused himself from hearing the trial under Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 10, Canon 3(E); and (2) the public defender, at the original trial, rendered ineffective assistance of counsel in violation of the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution and Article 1, Section 9 of the Tennessee Constitution. At the conclusion of an evidentiary hearing, the post-conviction court denied relief. Based upon our review of the entire record and applicable law, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

State of Tennessee v. Jonathan Blanchard
E2001-00314-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Judge James E. Beckner

The Appellant, Jonathan Blanchard, was convicted in 1988 of the sale or delivery of cocaine and sentenced to seven years in prison. Following the successful completion of his sentence, the Appellant was granted a pardon by the governor of Tennessee. The Appellant subsequently petitioned for an expungement of all public records relating to his arrest and conviction. The trial court denied the Appellant's petition and the Appellant appealed as of right. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Shirley Spina
E2001-02933-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Judge Phyllis H. Miller

The Defendant, Shirley Spina, was indicted in Sullivan County for custodial interference. On the morning of trial, the trial court dismissed the charge for lack of venue. The State now appeals. We reverse the ruling of the trial court and remand this cause for further proceedings.

State of Tennessee v. Edward Buck Franklin
M2001-02303-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Judge Jane W. Wheatcraft

Defendant, Edward Buck Franklin, pled guilty to two counts of attempted rape and one count of aggravated burglary. He received a sentence of three years for each conviction, with two of the sentences to be served concurrently with each other but consecutive to the sentence for the third conviction, for an effective sentence of six years. After receiving credit for time previously served in jail, his sentences were suspended and he was placed on probation. Thereafter, three probation violation warrants were filed against him. Following a hearing on the third warrant, the trial court revoked Defendant's probation and ordered that he serve his sentence in the Department of Correction. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. James Michael Scott
M2001-02000-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge Jane W. Wheatcraft
The defendant contests the sentences he received for his convictions of aggravated burglary (six years), aggravated assault (five years), and theft over $10,000 (four years). The court ordered the burglary and assault convictions to run consecutively to each other. We conclude upon de novo review that, although the trial court misapplied certain enhancement factors, those remaining were properly applied and justified the sentences. Additionally, the fact that this offense was committed while on probation justified the imposition of consecutive sentences. We affirm the judgments.

State of Tennessee v. James Ray Bartlett - Order
M2001-02419-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley

Defendant appeals the circuit court judgments denying him probation on two misdemeanor counts of passing worthless checks. We affirm pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals.

Gale Smith & Co. v. The Governors Club
M2001-01616-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Timothy L. Easter
This is a breach of contract case. The defendant real estate developer developed a golf club. The plaintiff insurance broker entered into an insurance binder with the manager of the golf club. The "master" binder covered five separate properties with which the manager was involved. The binder listed another of the manager's entities as the insured. The manager was later terminated by the defendant and a new management company was hired to manage the golf club. The insurance broker then issued a separate policy naming the defendant as the insured and sent invoices for the unpaid premiums to the new management company. The management company declined to pay the premiums. The insurance broker then filed suit against the defendant. The trial court entered a judgment for the insurance broker for all unpaid premiums due under the insurance binder, plus interest. We affirm, finding that manager had the apparent authority to enter into an insurance contract and that there was a contract for insurance between the parties.

Vernessa Ekelem vs. Ifeatu Ekelem
W2001-02986-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Ron E. Harmon
This is a divorce case. Both parties are physicians. Both have children from previous marriages, and they have three children together. The parties' three children were minors at the time of the divorce hearing. The father earned substantial income in 1996, which fell precipitously when he started his own medical practice in 1998. His medical practice, however, owns luxury vehicles, and the father owns a large home with significant acreage. The trial court found the father's earning capacity to be at the level of the mother's income, set child support based on that earning capacity, and established the father's parenting time with the parties' children. The father was ordered to assume the parties' tax debt, and to cease making derogatory remarks about the mother. On appeal, the father argues that the trial court erred in setting child support, in setting parenting time, in assigning the tax liability to him, and in enjoining him from making derogatory comments about the mother. We affirm as modified, and remand, awarding the mother attorney's fees for this appeal.

Daniel Goodwin vs. John Dunlap
W2002-00014-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: D'Army Bailey
This is a legal malpractice action originally filed by individual plaintiff and a corporation. The individual plaintiff was acting pro se for himself and also for the corporation. The trial court granted summary judgment to defendant based upon his affidavit that he complied with the standard of care representing the corporate plaintiff, that he had no attorney/client relationship with the individual plaintiff. No countervailing affidavit concerning the standard of care was filed by the plaintiffs and the dismissal of the corporation's case was also premised on the rule that a corporation cannot act pro se by a nonlawyer agent. Individual plaintiff's affidavit does not specifically refute defendant's affidavit concerning no attorney-client relationship between the individual plaintiff and defendant. Plaintiffs appeal. We affirm.

Felicia Webb vs. Ernest Gillespie
W2001-02828-COA-R3-JV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Howard W. Horne

Edward/James/Leigh Hutchinson vs. Nancy Neuman & James Day
W2001-02886-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Trial Court Judge: Dewey C. Whitenton
This is a will construction case. The husband devised a life estate in land to his wife, and at her death, to his devisees. The husband devised other land in fee simple to his wife, and gave her the rest and residue of his estate. The husband died in 1954 and the wife died in 1998. The remaindermen under the husband's will argued that certain real property was included in the wife's life estate and, thus, at her death, devolved to them. The beneficiaries of the wife's will argued that the real property in question was not included in the life estate or mentioned in the husband's will, and thus the land went to the wife in fee simple by operation of the residue clause in the husband's will and should now devolve to them. The trial court found that the husband intended to include the land in question in the life estate to the wife. Therefore, the land devolved to the husband's devisees. The beneficiaries of the wife's estate appeal. We affirm.

Felicia Webb vs. Ernest Gillespie
W2001-02828-COA-R3-JV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Harold W. Horne

Dagmar Moss vs. Alvin Moss
W2001-02809-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Dewey C. Whitenton
Wife filed a complaint for divorce alleging inappropriate marital conduct and, in the alternative, irreconcilable differences, and husband filed a counterclaim for divorce on the same grounds. The chancery court awarded the wife an absolute divorce and alimony in solido in the amount of $1,000.00, to be paid toward her attorney fees, but denied wife's claim for alimony in futuro. Wife appeals. We affirm as modified and remand.

Norman Hamby vs. State
W2002-00928-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
This is a premises liability case arising from Plaintiff's fall into a ventilation pit on the University of Tennessee at Memphis (referred to herein as UT) campus when an aluminum grate covering the opening collapsed while Plaintiff was standing on it. The Commissioner of Claims of the Western Division held that the accident was not foreseeable and that UT did not have actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition of the grating over the pit. Plaintiff appeals. We reverse and remand.