Opinions

State of Tennessee v. Richard Crawford
W2000-00335-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Judge W. Otis Higgs, Jr.

Defendant, Richard Crawford, was convicted at a bench trial of theft of a motor vehicle valued over $10,000. On appeal, the defendant raises the following two issues for our review: (1) whether the evidence was sufficient to support his conviction for theft; and (2) whether the value of the vehicle was properly established. The judgment of the Shelby County Criminal Court is affirmed.

State of Tennessee v. Richard Crawford - Dissenting
W2000-00335-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Judge W. Otis Higgs, Jr.

Our law provides: “A person charged with an offense has no burden to prove his innocence.”  TENN.CODE ANN.§39-11-201(c). Because I am unable to disregard this most basic principle of law, I am also unable to affirm the judgment of conviction in this case.

State of Tennessee v. C. Curtis Brown
W1999-01933-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: Judge Bernie Weinman

The defendant, after having his authority to write bonds in the 30th Judicial District revoked, appeals the trial court's decision and asserts that there was insufficient evidence to support the trial court's findings. Furthermore, the defendant asserts that the trial court's action was excessive. After review, we affirm the trial court in all respects.

Earnest L. White v. State of Tennessee - Order
W2000-01908-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry L. Smith

The petitioner, Earnest L. White, appeals the order of the Shelby County Criminal Court summarily dismissing his habeas corpus/post-conviction petition without conducting an evidentiary hearing or appointing counsel. Though styled as a petition for habeas corpus relief, White asserts therein that ten of his 1984 convictions should be set aside because of constitutional infirmities in the process surrounding the entry of his guilty pleas for these offenses. As the issues raised provide no basis for habeas corpus relief but rather set out traditional post-conviction concerns, the trial court considered this pro se petition as one for post-conviction relief. However, the trial court thereafter found that the petition had been filed past the applicable statute of limitations and, therefore, dismissed the petition. After a review of the record before this Court, we find that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed pursuant to Rule 20, Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals.

Billy J. Grooms v. State of Tennessee
E2000-00958-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Gary R Wade
Trial Court Judge: Judge Rex Henry Ogle

The petitioner, Billy J. Grooms, appeals the trial court's denial of a pro se petition to correct an illegal judgment/sentence. The trial court's order of dismissal is affirmed.

Curley Howse vs. Donal Campbell, et al
M1999-01580-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Hamilton V. Gayden, Jr.
This is a pro se civil rights action brought by a prisoner challenging the conditions of his confinement and his treatment by employees of the Tennessee Department of Correction and the Northwest Correctional Center in Lake County. After the prisoner's suit was transferred from the Chancery Court for Davidson County to the Circuit Court for Davidson County, the various defendants filed separate motions to dismiss the case for improper venue. The trial court granted the motions and dismissed all the prisoner's claims. On this appeal, the prisoner asserts that his claims should not have been dismissed. We have determined that the prisoner has not properly perfected an appeal with regard to the dismissal of his claims against the Commissioner of Correction and three other employees and that the trial court correctly dismissed his claim against the medical director of the Northwest Correctional Center for improper venue. Accordingly, we affirm the dismissal of the prisoner's complaint.

Don Williams vs. Donal Campbell
M2000-01821-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
A prison disciplinary board extended the release eligibility date of an inmate, after finding him guilty of assaulting a guard. He filed a petition for writ of certiorari which challenged the method used by the Department of Correction to calculate his new release eligibility date. The trial court dismissed the petition. We affirm.

Betty J. Nash vs. G.L. Waynick
M2000-02096-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: John J. Maddux
This appeal involves a dispute over the sale of a single family home in DeKalb County. The purchaser filed suit in the Circuit Court for DeKalb County alleging that the seller had violated the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act and the Tennessee Residential Property Disclosures Act. More than two years after the first two summonses were returned unserved, the purchaser caused a third summons to be issued that was served on the seller. The trial court entered a $27,000 default judgment against the seller on June 21, 2000, after concluding that the seller had been properly served and had presented no defenses to the purchaser's claims. On this appeal, the seller, who has been representing himself throughout these proceedings, asserts that he did not violate either the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act or the Tennessee Residential Property Disclosure Act and that the trial court erred by not considering his statute of limitations defense. We have determined that the purchaser's suit is time-barred for failure to comply with Tenn. R. Civ. P. 3. Therefore, we reverse the judgment and remand the case with directions that the purchaser's complaint be dismissed.

Michael Martin vs. Roderick Scott, et al
M2000-02330-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Irvin H. Kilcrease, Jr.
Michael D. Martin, an incarcerated state prisoner, filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari challenging a prison disciplinary proceeding whereby he was convicted by the Prison Disciplinary Board of burglary and sentenced to ten days punitive segregation and a $4.00 fine. The Chancellor dismissed the petition and we affirm the Chancellor.

Arthur Armstrong, a/k/a Haki Al-Bey vs. Dept. of Correction, et al
M2000-02328-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
An inmate who was found guilty of three disciplinary infractions challenged those convictions by filing a Petition for Writ of Certiorari. The trial court dismissed the Petition. We affirm the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Christopher Osborne
M2000-00802-CCA-R8-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Joe G. Riley
Trial Court Judge: Judge Timothy L. Easter

A Williamson County jury convicted the defendant of attempted first degree murder and felony reckless endangerment. The trial court sentenced him to concurrent sentences of twenty-four years and two years, respectively, as a Range I standard offender. In this appeal, the defendant alleges (1) the attempted first degree murder presentment was defective; (2) the proof was insufficient to sustain his attempted first degree murder conviction; (3) the trial judge erroneously failed to satisfy his "thirteenth juror" role; and (4) his sentence is excessive. Upon review of the record, we find no reversible error and affirm the judgments and sentences imposed by the trial court.

Eddie Phifer v. Board of Parole
M2000-01509-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
This is a pro se appeal from a denial of parole. Mr. Phifer alleges several problems surrounding his parole hearing that he claims violate his due process and equal protection rights and violate the ex post facto constitutional prohibition. Because a prisoner has no liberty interest in release on parole before the expiration of his sentence, due process protections do not attach to parole determinations. Because at the time of Mr. Phifer's crime and conviction, the law regarding parole gave total discretion to the Board and authorized denial if the Board found that parole would depreciate the seriousness of the crime committed, changes in Board procedure do not violate ex post facto prohibitions. Because the Board has provided a rational basis for denying in-person interviews for prisoners housed out of state, no equal protection violation was shown. Consequently, we affirm the trial court's dismissal of the petition for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.

David Britt vs. Donal Campbell, et al
M2000-01423-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Ellen H. Lyle
A prison inmate escaped from custody and was recaptured. After a disciplinary hearing, the Department of Correction extended his Release Eligibility Date so that he would have to serve an additional 20% of his sentence before being considered for parole. The prisoner filed a Petition for Declaratory Judgment, contending that the Department's action violated statutory and constitutional law. The trial court dismissed the Petition. We affirm.

Joseph Turley vs. Francis P. Marino, et al
M2000-01684-COA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Walter C. Kurtz
Appellant, Joseph Turley, was charged with two counts of criminal contempt by the trial court in an order issued May 3, 2000. The trial court appointed a special prosecutor to pursue this matter and appointed the public defender to represent the appellant. The trial on June 15, 2000 resulted in a trial court finding of guilty, after which the appellant was sentenced to 48 hours in jail. Turley appeals, and we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Larry W. Hopkins vs. Bd. of Paroles
M2000-01956-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William C. Koch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
This appeal involves a prisoner's efforts to be paroled from his sentence for aggravated rape. After the Tennessee Board of Paroles declined for the sixth time to parole him, the prisoner filed a petition for common-law writ of certiorari in the Chancery Court challenging the Board's latest decision and the procedure used to reach it. The trial court dismissed the petition for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted, and the prisoner has appealed. We affirm the trial court's decision.

Dr. Robert Emans v. Board of Regents
M2000-02187-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Per Curiam
The Claimant was appointed Dean of the College of Education of Tennessee State University in 1990, evidenced by a Notice of Appointment and Agreement of Employment. Four years later, he was terminated as Dean, and appointed to the tenured position of Professor, at a lesser salary. In this action he sought damages for breach of contract, inter alia. The Commission ruled that the Claimant, although lawfully terminated as Dean, was nevertheless entitled to receive the salary of a deanship.

Rickey Cotten v. Board of Paroles
M2001-00875-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Walter C. Kurtz
Petitioner was arrested in Florida for grand theft auto while on parole under a sentence in Tennessee. After beginning his sentence on the Florida conviction in a Florida prison, the Petitioner filed a "request for leave to waive revocation hearing, admission to violation of parole and request to have parole hearing in absentia and affidavit" with the Board of Paroles of Tennessee. The Board did not respond, so Petitioner filed a writ of mandamus with the Circuit Court for Davidson County to compel the Board to render a decision regarding his parole revocation. The trial court denied the writ and dismissed the petition because mandamus was not the appropriate remedy and the Petitioner was not in custody of the State of Tennessee for the purposes of parole revocation. We agree and affirm the decision of the trial court.

Tony Willis v. Dept of Correction
M2000-01397-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle

Mitchell Hall v. Cracker Barrel Old Country Store
E2000-00470-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: John K. Byers, Sr. J.
Trial Court Judge: W. Frank Brown, III, Chancellor
The plaintiff brought this workers' compensation claim in which he alleges a drawer fell on his foot while he was working for the defendant. The trial judge found the plaintiff failed to show an injury by accident arising in the scope and course of his employment and dismissed the case. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Johnny & Mary Jo Harper, et al vs. Melvin Sloan, et al
M2000-01104-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Trial Court Judge: William H. Inman
This appeal involves the determination of whether the trial court erred in determining that a pathway known as Jaybird Lane was a public road. Additionally, the trial court found that the road had not been abandoned and thus granted summary judgment to the Defendants. For the following reasons, we affirm the ruling of the court below in all respects.

Janice Sadler, d/b/a Xanadu Video vs. State
M2000-01103-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
The owner of a business filed a claim in the Tennessee Claims Commission for the loss of the business caused by a construction project that temporarily hindered ingress and egress to the claimant's location. The Claims Commissioner awarded the claimant the value of her business after finding that the State had negligently prolonged the construction project and had created a temporary nuisance. We reverse.

Bertha Smith vs. Harley Smith
M1998-00937-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Carol A. Catalano
The issues in this post-divorce case arise because the former husband's waiver of military retirement pay in order to receive disability benefits affected the former wife's receipt of her portion of the retirement pay which had been awarded to her in the distribution of marital property. The former husband reduced his payments to the former wife, who filed a contempt petition, seeking to reinstate the previously ordered amounts. The trial court considered the intent embodied in the divorce decree, and determined that the former wife should continue to receive the amount she received at the time of the divorce, despite the fact that the former husband no longer received "retirement pay." In light of our Supreme Court's holding in Johnson v. Johnson, No. W1999-01232-SC-R11-CV, 2001 WL 173502 (Tenn. Feb. 23, 2001), we affirm.

Tony Willis v. Dept of Correction
M2000-01397-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Patricia J. Cottrell
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle

State of Tennessee v. Joseph Vella
E2000-01149-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Judge Mary Beth Leibowitz

The Defendant, Joseph Vella, appeals as of right from his criminal trespass conviction. He asserts that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support his conviction. We disagree; accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

State of Tennessee v. Prentiss Phillips
W2000-00245-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Judge James C. Beasley, Jr.

The defendant was convicted by a Shelby County jury of first degree murder and especially aggravated kidnapping. He was sentenced by the jury to life without the possibility of parole for the murder conviction. He also received a sentence of twenty-five years for the especially aggravated kidnapping conviction, to be served consecutively to his life sentence. The events of this case arose out of a confrontation between rival gangs living in the Hurt Village Apartments in Memphis. The defendant, a high-ranking member of the Gangster Disciples, was prosecuted for the crimes on a theory of criminal responsibility. In this appeal as of right, the defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his convictions. After a thorough review of the extensive record in this case, we conclude that the evidence is sufficient to show that the defendant, acting with the intent to promote the commission of the charged offenses, directed and aided other members of the Gangster Disciples in the commission of the offenses. His convictions for first degree murder and especially aggravated kidnapping are, therefore, affirmed.