State vs. James Christopher Lewis
E1999-00802-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: R. Jerry Beck
The defendant entered an Alford plea to one count of attempted rape and two counts of sexual battery. He received a sentence of eight years as a Range II offender for the attempted rape and two years, as a Range I offender, for each of the sexual battery charges. All sentences were to be served concurrently. The defendant's request for a suspended sentence was denied after a lengthy hearing, and he raises that denial as the sole issue on appeal. Based upon our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Larry Burks
E1999-00571-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: J. Curtis Smith
The mobile home, which was the residence of the defendant and his wife, was searched, pursuant to a search warrant, and certain illegal substances were found. The defendant filed a motion to suppress, contesting the adequacy of the description of the place to be searched. Following a hearing on the motion and the trial court's upholding the validity of the search warrant, the defendant entered a plea of guilty to a drug offense, reserving as certified questions of law the adequacy of the portion of the search warrant describing the place to be searched and whether the search warrant sufficiently established the reliability of the confidential informant. Based upon our review, we affirm the finding of the trial court that the description of the premises was adequate. Our consideration of the second certified question of law is waived because this issue was not pursued on appeal.

State vs. Samuel Wayne Loveday
E1999-01090-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Ray L. Jenkins
The defendant, who was convicted of attempted aggravated rape, aggravated sexual battery, and aggravated assault, appealed these convictions, presenting as issues whether the out-of-court showup identification of the defendant was impermissibly suggestive and whether the subsequent in-court identification was tainted as a result. Based upon our review, we conclude that these issues are without merit and, thus, affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Wilson
E1996-00006-SC-R11-CD
Authoring Judge: Justice Adolpho A. Birch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.
This is an appeal from the Circuit Court for Blount County, where Brandon Wilson, the defendant, pleaded guilty to seven counts of delivery of cocaine and to three counts (merged by the trial court into one count) of possession of cocaine with the intent to sell or deliver. Wilson appealed to the Court of Criminal Appeals contending, inter alia, that his indictments were legally insufficient and that the trial court erred in accepting the guilty plea because it was not voluntarily entered. The Court of Criminal Appeals agreed and reversed Wilson's convictions on all counts. We hold that the seven indictments for delivery of cocaine are sufficient; Wilson's convictions on these indictments are, therefore, reinstated. Additionally, because the issue concerning the voluntariness of Wilson's plea was not properly before the intermediate appellate court, we reinstate the conviction for possession of cocaine. This reinstatement is without prejudice to Wilson's right to file a petition for post-conviction relief within the appropriate time.

State vs. Larry E. Scales
M1998-00142-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Gary R Wade
Trial Court Judge: Charles D. Haston, Sr.
The defendant, Larry E. Scales, appeals his conviction of theft over $500 and his six-year sentence as a career offender. Because the trial court erroneously instructed the jury on the possible range of punishment, the judgment is reversed and the defendant is granted a new trial.

State vs. Robert C. Copas
M1999-00841-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry Smith
Trial Court Judge: Jane W. Wheatcraft
The defendant, Robert C. Copas, was indicted by a Sumner County Grand Jury for one count of aggravated rape. After discovering that the recording of the defendant's preliminary hearing was inaudible, the defendant moved to dismiss the indictment and remand for a new preliminary hearing pursuant to rule 5.1 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure. Following a hearing, the trial court did not dismiss the indictment, but remanded for a new preliminary hearing. The state then moved to dismiss the indictment, arguing that case law requires dismissal of the indictment under these circumstances. The court agreed and dismissed the indictment but the state then brought this appeal. Because the trial court's dismissal of the indictment and remand for a new preliminary hearing was an appropriate remedy for a violation of the Tenn. R. Crim. P. 5.1 (a) the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

State vs. Justin Victory
M2000-00015-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Sr. Judge L. Terry Lafferty
Trial Court Judge: Steve R. Dozier
The defendant, Justin Victory, entered a plea of guilty to the offense of aggravated burglary before the Davidson County Criminal Court. Pursuant to the plea agreement, the defendant was to receive a sentence of four (4) years, with the manner of service to be determined by the trial court. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court denied the defendant's request for an alternative sentence and ordered the defendant to serve the sentence in the Davidson County CCA. Also, the trial court advised the defendant that upon completion of the Life Lines Substance Abuse Program, the trial court would suspend the balance of the sentence and determine proper restitution. In this appeal of right, the defendant complains that the trial court erred in denying him supervised probation. After a review of the record, the briefs of parties and applicable law, we modify the manner of the service of the defendant's sentence to 214 days incarceration with the remainder served on supervised probation.

State vs. Jerry D. Carney
M1999-01139-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Cheryl A. Blackburn
The appellant, Jerry D. Carney, appeals his conviction by a jury in the Davidson County Criminal Court of first degree murder. Pursuant to his conviction for first degree murder, the trial court sentenced the appellant to life in prison in the Tennessee Department of Correction, with the possibility of parole. The appellant raises the following issues for our review: (1) whether there was sufficient evidence of premeditation to support his conviction of first degree murder; (2) whether the State violated Brady by failing to disclose audio taped statements made by the police of witnesses the day after the shooting; and (3) whether the trial court erred in precluding the appellant's cross-examination of the police officers who were testifying at trial about their training regarding self-defense and the application of deadly force. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State vs. Barry Waters Rogers
M1999-01358-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Gary R Wade
Trial Court Judge: Robert L. Jones
The defendant, Barry Waters Rogers, was indicted for arson, conspiracy to commit arson, and vandalism. The jury acquitted the defendant on the charge of conspiracy to commit arson but, on the arson charge, returned a guilty verdict on the lesser included offense of facilitation of arson. Although the jury also returned a guilty verdict for facilitation of vandalism, the trial court later set that aside. The trial court imposed a Range I sentence of three and one-half years in the Department of Correction, with probation to be granted after the first year of service. In this appeal of right, the defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence and complains that he was improperly sentenced. We find no error and affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Russell E. Mills
II-199-28-A
Trial Court Judge: Timothy L. Easter

Michelle Baker Pisano v. Gerry Baker
W1999-02660-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: William Michael Maloan

Frank Mills vs. Luis Wong
W1999-00665-COA-R9-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Robert A. Lanier
This appeal presents a dispute over proper venue arising out of a medical malpractice suit against multiple defendants. The Shelby County Circuit Court denied the Defendant's motion to dismiss for improper venue. The case is before this court on an interlocutory appeal.

Sam Simpson vs. Addie Davis
W1999-00689-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Martha B. Brasfield
This appeal arises from a breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment action initiated by Sam Simpson against Addie Davis. Simpson alleged Davis breached her duty as trustee of her deceased mother's estate and was unjustly enriched by Simpson's construction of a residence on Davis' property. The trial court held that although Davis did not breach a fiduciary duty, she was unjustly enriched. The court ordered the sale of both the property and residence with proceeds to be allocated between the parties. Davis appeals.

State of Tennessee v. Larry E. Scales
1998-00142-CCA-R3-CD
Trial Court Judge: Charles D. Haston, Sr.

Steven Porreca v. Chili's Inc., & Liberty Mutual
E1999-00961-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: John K. Byers, Sr. J.
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Howell N. Peoples, Chancellor
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tennessee Code Annotated _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The plaintiff was burned while working for the defendant restaurant. The defendant did not dispute that the plaintiff suffered a compensable injury but did argue the award of fifty percent permanent partial disability was excessive and also contended the trial court should have allowed an offset for overpayment of approximately two weeks of temporary total disability. We affirm.

Smith v. Safety Kleen Corporation
E1999-01123-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Byers, Sr. J.
Trial Court Judge: Howell N. Peoples, Chancellor
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The plaintiff, Everett Alan Smith, filed various motions in this case, all of which were denied by the trial court. The plaintiff appeals from the trial court's: (1) refusal to award temporary total benefits from the date of injury until time of medical improvement rating by physician or from the date of injury until trial; (2) denial of a lump sum payment of attorney fees because the request was in the form of a motion rather than in the form of a petition; (3) denial of motion requiring the defendant to pay for medication and authorized physician benefits because the plaintiff sought these by motion rather than by petition. The plaintiff also raises the issue of whether the trial court erred in refusing to pay certain pharmacy charges. We affirm the judgment of the trial court in part, reverse the judgment in part, and remand the case to the trial court for further proceedings.

American Cable Corp. vs. ACI Management, Inc., et al
M1997-00280-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.
This appeal involves a legal dispute arising out of a contract to install television cable in Alabama and Mississippi. After the corporation that installed the cable did not receive full payment for its work, it filed suit in the Chancery Court for Davidson County Tennessee against the corporation and partnership that hired it and the president of the defendant corporation. The trial court granted a summary judgment dismissing the claims against the defendant corporation's president, and the installer took a default judgment against the corporation for $1,059,743. On this appeal, the installer takes issue with the summary judgment dismissing its claims against the defendant corporation's president. We have determined that the trial court properly granted the summary judgment because the installer failed to demonstrate that it will be able to prove all the essential elements of its tort claims against the defendant corporation's president.

Levenhagen vs. Levenhagen
M1998-00967-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Lee Russell
Husband appeals the trial court's refusal to vacate its order divorcing the parties, claiming the order is void because it failed to include an affirmative finding that the parties made adequate provision by written agreement for the custody and maintenance of their children. In addition, Husband contends that the trial court violated his due process rights by suspending his visitation with the couple's children until he received counseling, and then ordering supervised visitation. He also maintains that the trial court improperly based its finding that he was guilty of criminal contempt for failure to pay child support on insufficient evidence. Husband claims he was entitled to a jury trial on the contempt issue. We affirm the trial court in all respects.

Ofman vs. Woodford
M1999-00736-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Timothy L. Easter
This is a suit by an attorney for breach of an oral contract relative to the professional services of an expert witness. Suit was instituted by civil warrant in the general sessions court. Following a default judgment in favor of the plaintiff, an appeal was perfected by the defendant to the circuit court where the case was tried de novo, non-jury and resulted in a judgment for the plaintiff in the amount of $2,500.00. The defendant appealed, and we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Blaylock vs. Nash
M1999-00568-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: John A. Turnbull
This negligence action arises out of a collision between a cow and a car driven by the plaintiff. The trial court granted summary judgment to the defendant, the alleged owner and operator of a stockyard from which the cow supposedly escaped. We affirm the trial court's decision finding that the plaintiff presented no evidence that the defendant breached his duty of care. However, we do not find that the plaintiff's appeal of the trial court's decision was frivolous.

Fillmore vs. Fillmore
M1999-00714-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge David R. Farmer
Trial Court Judge: Carol A. Catalano
This appeal arises from a dispute between Appellant Stephen Douglas Fillmore and Appellee Karen Leigh (Anderson) Fillmore regarding the terms of their divorce. The court issued a Final Decree of Divorce, divided the parties' marital property and debts, and awarded Ms. Anderson alimony in solido. In addition, the court awarded custody of the one minor child to Ms. Anderson and set a child support amount based on the appropriate guidelines. On appeal, Mr. Fillmore argues that the trial court erred in its valuation of certain marital property, improperly awarded alimony in solido, and failed to include as a marital debt a pre-marital debt of Mr. Fillmore. In addition, Mr. Fillmore argues that the trial court improperly calculated his child support obligation based on his current income. We affirm the ruling of the trial court.

Henderson vs. Henderson
M1999-00912-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Donald P. Harris
This appeal involves a dispute over the Trial Court's valuation and division of marital property in this divorce action. Mrs. Henderson contends that the Trial Court undervalued the marital business, Quality Systems, Inc. Additionally, Mrs. Henderson asserts the Trial Court erred in dividing the marital assets and liabilities, denying alimony and attorney's fees and in ordering her to refund alimony pendente lite payments. We affirm the Trial Court's order, except for the denial of alimony. We vacate the Trial Court's determination on the issue of alimony and remand for a determination of the proper type and amount of alimony to be awarded to Mrs. Henderson.

Henderson vs. Henderson
M1999-00912-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Houston M. Goddard
Trial Court Judge: Donald P. Harris
This appeal involves a dispute over the Trial Court's valuation and division of marital property in this divorce action. Mrs. Henderson contends that the Trial Court undervalued the marital business, Quality Systems, Inc. Additionally, Mrs. Henderson asserts the Trial Court erred in dividing the marital assets and liabilities, denying alimony and attorney's fees and in ordering her to refund alimony pendente lite payments. We affirm the Trial Court's order, except for the denial of alimony. We vacate the Trial Court's determination on the issue of alimony and remand for a determination of the proper type and amount of alimony to be awarded to Mrs. Henderson.

Holley vs. Haehl
M1999-02105-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Jim T. Hamilton
Landowner sued adjoining landowner and timber cutter in general sessions court for trespass and the cutting of timber on her land. From an adverse judgment, landowner appealed to the circuit court. After a trial de novo, the trial court held that adjoining landowner owned the land involved by adverse possession and entered judgment for defendants. Landowner has appealed.

Edgar/Mary Mulrooney vs. Town of Collierville
W1999-01474-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: Walter L. Evans
This appeal arises from a quo warranto action filed by the Mulrooneys ("Property Owners") on behalf of residents of subdivisions annexed by Collierville ("Town"). Property Owners claimed that Town did not meet the statutory requirements needed to annex the subdivisions. The jury returned a verdict on behalf of Town, finding that the annexation was proper. Thereafter, Property Owners filed a motion for new trial which was denied by the court. Property Owners appeal.