State vs. Lester Douglas Giles E1999-02236-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Alan E. Glenn
Trial Court Judge: Carroll L. Ross
On June 21, 1999, the defendant pled guilty in the Monroe County Criminal Court to attempted rape and was sentenced to four years as a Range I standard offender. The sentence was suspended, and he was placed on probation. On July 6, 1999, a probation violation was issued, alleging that the defendant had violated his probation by having contact with the victim's family. Following a hearing on August 16, 1999, the trial court ruled that the defendant had violated the terms of his probation, a ruling which the defendant timely appealed. Based upon our review, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and reinstate the defendant's probation.
Monroe
Court of Criminal Appeals
Mary Zelek v. Flagstar System, M1999-00269-WC-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Loser, Sp. J.
Trial Court Judge: J. O. Bond, Judge
The employer contends the trial judge erred by accrediting the expert medical testimony of a non-approved physician chosen by the employee, or her attorney, and that the award of permanent partial disability benefits is excessive.
Wilson
Workers Compensation Panel
Thomas Rodgers, v. Tennessee Department of Corrections M1999-02585-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Herschel Pickens Franks, J.
Trial Court Judge: Hon. Carol L. Mccoy, Chancellor
In this Declaratory Judgment plaintiff sought statutory credits on his prison sentences. The Trial court granted the State summary judgment. On appeal, we affirm.
Abbott vs. Gateway M1999-00653-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Soloman
The General Sessions Court of Davidson County awarded a judgment against the defendant below, Nationwide Insurance Company, in a case involving a car accident. Nationwide filed an appeal to the Davidson County Circuit court but failed to secure a trial date within 45 days as required by Davidson County Local Rule of Practice 20(b) (1999). The circuit court dismissed the case due to Nationwide's failure, and Nationwide filed a Tennessee Rule of Civil Procedure 60.02 motion to set aside the circuit court dismissal due to its attorney's excusable neglect. When the circuit court denied Rule 60.02 relief Nationwide appealed to this court. On appeal, we reverse the decision of the circuit court finding that it should have granted Nationwide's request for Rule 60.02 relief and set aside the dismissal of Nationwide's circuit court appeal.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Rodney Buford vs. State M1999-00487-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Gary R Wade
Trial Court Judge: Timothy L. Easter
The petitioner, Rodney Buford, is serving an effective sentence of life plus twenty years. His petition for habeas corpus relief was properly dismissed by the trial court because the judgment is not facially invalid and the sentence has not been served.
Hickman
Court of Criminal Appeals
George Todd vs. State M1999-00976-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: L. Craig Johnson
The Defendant appeals from the trial court's dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. The trial court found that the petition was barred by the statute of limitations. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Coffee
Court of Criminal Appeals
George Todd vs. State M1999-00976-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: L. Craig Johnson
The Defendant appeals from the trial court's dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. The trial court found that the petition was barred by the statute of limitations. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Coffee
Court of Criminal Appeals
Clark vs. Crow M1999-00916-COA-R9-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Marietta M. Shipley
We grant this interlocutory appeal to consider a question of first impression regarding whether there is a right to jury trial prior to the issuance of an order of protection pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 36-3-605, (hereinafter "order of protection"). Specifically, we are asked to determine whether a party against whom an order of protection is sought is entitled to a jury trial as a matter of right before this order is issued. After reviewing Tennessee's constitutional and statutory guarantees to a jury trial, we have determined that there is no right to a jury trial prior to the issuance of an order of protection. The circuit court's decision is affirmed and remanded for further proceedings.
State vs. Edward T. Flye M1999-01183-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Gary R Wade
The defendant, Edward T. Flye, challenges the sufficiency of the evidence used to convict him of aggravated burglary and evading arrest. Because the evidence is adequate to support the convictions, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Davidson
Court of Criminal Appeals
Tuttle vs. Tuttle M1999-01578-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: L. Craig Johnson
In a previous appeal, this divorce case was remanded to the trial court for a determination of whether the parties had any marital property and, if so, for the trial court to make an equitable division thereof. From the trial court's final decree in compliance with the order of remand, defendant appeals.
Coffee
Court of Appeals
In re: Adoption of a male child, Derrick Douglas Duncan M1999-01713-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: C. K. Smith
This appeal involves a petition by prospective adoptive parents for termination of parental rights, temporary guardianship, and for adoption of the minor child of the defendant father. In a non-jury trial, at the conclusion of petitioner's proof, the trial court found that they had failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that the defendant father had abandoned the child and dismissed the petition. The prospective adoptive parents have appealed.
Smith
Court of Appeals
State vs. John Wayne Gray M1999-01615-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Buddy D. Perry
The Defendant, John Wayne Gray, appeals as of right from his conviction of the sale of a schedule II controlled substance. On appeal, he argues (1) that the trial court erred by failing to grant his motion for acquittal or directed verdict because the State failed to establish circumstances and facts that would provide for a reasonable assurance of the identity of the evidence and because the State failed to establish an unbroken chain of custody; (2) that the evidence was insufficient as a matter of law to support the jury verdict; and (3) that the trial court erred in sentencing the Defendant to a mid-range sentence as a Range III offender. We find no error. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Franklin
Court of Criminal Appeals
Phelps vs. TDOC M1999-02109-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Cain
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Mccoy
Petitioner/Appellant, a state prisoner, filed his petition for common law certiorari asserting that he was being unconstitutionally and illegally incarcerated by the state and had not been given proper credits under various sentence reduction credit statutes and policies. The trial court granted summary judgment and Petitioner appealed. We affirm.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Blankinship vs. TDOC M1999-02381-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Ellen Hobbs Lyle
A prisoner filed a petition to compel the Department of Correction to establish a mandatory parole date for his benefit. The trial court dismissed the petition for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. We affirm the trial court.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Green vs. Innovative Recovery Services, Inc. M1999-02227-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Mccoy
The attorney for a woman who had been injured in an auto accident claimed that his services entitled him to a portion of the subrogation interest asserted by TennCare against the settlement proceeds. The trial court dismissed his claim. We affirm the trial court.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
Witt vs. Witt M1999-02234-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Trial Court Judge: Muriel Robinson
This is an appeal of the trial court's division of marital property in a divorce proceeding. Finding no error in the trial court's judgment, we affirm.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
William Lavern Davis vs. State M2000-00341-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: William Charles Lee
The petitioner argues that in finding that his trial counsel was not ineffective and denying his post-conviction petition, the petitioner appeals from the trial court's denial of his post-conviction petition. He argues that the trial court erred by finding that his trial counsel was not ineffective. The trial court's order is affirmed.
Marshall
Court of Criminal Appeals
Rodgers vs. TDOC M1999-02585-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Herschel P. Franks
Trial Court Judge: Carol L. Mccoy
In this Declaratory Judgment plaintiff sought statutory credits on his prison sentences. The Trial court granted the State summary judgment. On appeal, we affirm.
Davidson
Court of Appeals
State vs. Daniel Joe James M1999-1423-CCA-R3-CD
Trial Court Judge: Buddy D. Perry
On September 9, 1998, the Defendant, Daniel Joe James, was charged with possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver. The Defendant was convicted by a jury of simple possession of a controlled substance. He received a sentence of eleven months and twenty-nine days probation and was fined $2,500.00. The Defendant now challenges the sufficiency of the convicting evidence. On appeal, the State has conceded that the evidence is insufficient to support a conviction. After a careful examination of the record, we agree that there is insufficient evidence against the Defendant to support a conviction. Therefore, we reverse the judgment of the trial court.
Franklin
Court of Criminal Appeals
State vs. Bobby Perkins W1999-01368-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: J. Steven Stafford
The defendant, Bobby Earl Perkins, appeals his conviction for especially aggravated robbery, contending that the trial court erred (1) by allowing a witness to testify about the defendant's statement a year before the robbery that he planned to rob the victim, (2) by allowing a police officer to testify to statements the victim made regarding the defendant, and (3) by sentencing the defendant to twenty-one years. We affirm the conviction, but we modify the sentence to twenty years.
Haywood
Court of Criminal Appeals
Glenda Tate vs. Baptist Memorial W1999-00553-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Kay S. Robilio
Hospital employee was accused of negotiating payroll checks of other employees and was discharged. Employee filed defamation suit, and trial court granted summary judgment because the pleadings and affidavits established that there was no publication of the alleged defamatory words since all communication thereof was to hospital employees.
Shelby
Court of Appeals
Glenda Tate vs. Baptist Memorial W1999-00553-COA-R3-CV
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Trial Court Judge: Kay S. Robilio
Hospital employee was accused of negotiating payroll checks of other employees and was discharged. Employee filed defamation suit, and trial court granted summary judgment because the pleadings and affidavits established that there was no publication of the alleged defamatory words since all communication thereof was to hospital employees.
Shelby
Court of Appeals
State vs. Selina Harrelson W1999-00521-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Trial Court Judge: C. Creed Mcginley
The defendant, Selina G. Harrelson, was convicted of possession of one-half gram or more of cocaine with intent to sell. She contends that the officer did not have probable cause to search the truck with the drug detection dog; that the evidence is insufficient to show that she possessed crack cocaine; and that the trial court should have imposed a sentence alternative to incarceration. We hold that the defendant lacked a reasonable expectation of privacy in the truck to contest the search and that, in any event, the officer had probable cause. We hold that the evidence is sufficient to support the conviction and that the trial court properly sentenced the defendant to incarceration. We affirm the judgment of conviction.