Kennath Artez Henderson v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, Kennath Artez Henderson, appeals the Fayette County Circuit Court’s |
Fayette | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
G'Wayne Williams v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, G’wayne Williams, appeals the Lauderdale County Circuit Court’s denial |
Lauderdale | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Craig Markeem Taylor v. Brandon Watwood, Warden
The Petitioner, Craig Markeem Taylor, appeals the dismissal of his petition for writ of |
Lake | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Eric Pike
The Lauderdale County Grand Jury indicted Defendant, Eric Pike, on one count of attempted second degree murder, one count of aggravated assault by strangulation, and one count of violating an order of protection. Pursuant to a plea agreement, Defendant pleaded guilty to the count of aggravated assault by strangulation, and the remaining counts were dismissed. Per the parties’ agreement, the trial court classified Defendant as a Range III persistent offender and imposed a ten-year sentence. After a sentencing hearing, the trial court ordered Defendant to serve this sentence in custody of the Tennessee Department of Correction (TDOC) and consecutively to an existing sentence for initiation of the process to manufacture methamphetamine. Defendant then filed a motion to withdraw his guilty plea, which the trial court denied. Defendant appeals, arguing: (1) the trial court erred in denying Defendant’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea; and (2) the trial court abused its discretion by ordering Defendant to serve his sentence consecutively to his existing sentence. After review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Lauderdale | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Robert Winters
Robert Winters, Defendant, appeals from the dismissal of a motion filed under Rule 36.1 |
Hamilton | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Thomas Fleming Mabry v. The Board of Professional Responsibility of the Tennessee Supreme Court
This is an appeal in a lawyer-disciplinary proceeding involving Tennessee attorney Thomas |
Knox | Supreme Court | |
State of Tennessee v. Alexander Ruben Carino
The Defendant, Alexander Ruben Carino, filed a motion to correct an illegal sentence pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 36.1. He alleged that his consecutive sentences were illegal because the trial court made no findings that consecutive sentences were appropriate. The trial court denied the motion after finding that the sentences were imposed pursuant to the Defendant’s valid plea agreement. On our review, we respectfully affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Cumberland | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Roger Terrell v. State of Tennessee
Petitioner, Roger Terrell, appeals from the Madison County Circuit Court’s denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. On appeal, Petitioner contends he received the ineffective assistance of counsel at trial. After review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Madison | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
In Re Nation F.
This is a termination of parental rights case. The trial court terminated Mother’s and |
Carroll | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Joshua Steven Sullivan
A Knox County jury convicted the Defendant, Joshua Steven Sullivan, of two counts of |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
J.E. Allen Company, LLC v. Progress Construction Inc., ET AL.
An owner and a contractor executed a standard form construction agreement. The contract |
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Matthew F. Beasley
Defendant, Matthew F. Beasley, appeals the trial court’s order revoking his probationary sentence for aggravated assault and ordering him to serve the balance of his ten-year sentence in confinement. Following our review of the entire record and the briefs of the parties, we find no abuse of discretion and affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Macon | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Charles Felix Bell, Jr.
Defendant, Charles Felix Bell, Jr., appeals the trial court’s order revoking his probationary sentence for possession of cocaine with intent to sell. Following our review of the entire record and the briefs of the parties, we find no abuse of discretion and affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Marvin L. Miller v. City of LaFollette et al.
The genesis of this case lies in the investigation into a city’s police department and subsequent termination of the appellant, a former police department employee. After the appellant was terminated, his counsel sent a public records request to the city, one of the appellees herein, pursuant to the Tennessee Public Records Act. Through this public records request, the city was asked for copies of, among other things, “investigative material” related to the appellant. Although some records were initially produced in response to the public records request, other records were not provided until after litigation was initiated by the appellant in chancery court. Certain “investigatory” records that had formerly been in the possession of an attorney hired by the city to investigate the police department were not ever produced. Although the parties dispute whether such “investigatory” records would be subject to disclosure under the Tennessee Public Records Act, such records had, according to the findings of the chancery court, been destroyed by the time the city received the public records request at issue herein. Upon the conclusion of the trial litigation, the chancery court also found that “all requested documents that exist had been provided” and determined that the city “did not willfully refuse to disclose documents and records.” In light of its determination that the city did not act willfully, the chancery court held that attorney’s fees would not be awarded in this case. For the reasons stated herein, the chancery court’s judgment is affirmed in part and vacated in part, and the case is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. |
Campbell | Court of Appeals | |
Kip Dylane Buie v. State of Tennessee
The Petitioner, Kip Dylane Buie, pled guilty to second degree murder and attempted second degree murder. He received an effective forty-year sentence. Subsequently, he filed a petition for post-conviction relief, alleging that his plea counsel was ineffective during the plea process and that his guilty pleas were not knowingly and voluntarily entered. After a hearing, the post-conviction court denied the petition, and the Petitioner appealed to this Court. On our review, we respectfully affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Lawrence | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Jim George Conaser v. State of Tennessee
A Davidson County jury convicted the Petitioner, Jim George Conaser, of aggravated assault, and the trial court sentenced him to serve a term of twelve years as a Range III, persistent offender. Thereafter, he filed a petition for post-conviction relief alleging that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel when trial counsel failed to object to character evidence and hearsay. The post-conviction court denied the petition after a hearing. On our review, we respectfully affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. |
Davidson | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Christopher Layne Spencer
The Defendant, Christopher Layne Spencer, was convicted by a Knox County Criminal Court jury of two counts of aggravated sexual battery, a Class B felony, and violating the sexual offender registration act, a Class E felony. See T.C.A. §§ 39-13-504 (2018) (aggravated sexual battery); 40-39-211(k) (2019) (sexual offender registry). The Defendant was sentenced to an effective fourteen years for the convictions. On appeal, the Defendant contends that (1) the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction for violating the sexual offender registry, (2) the trial court erred by admitting text messages as evidence, (3) the trial court erred by denying his request for a mistrial, (4) the trial court erred by limiting his closing argument, (5) the prosecutor engaged in improper closing argument, (6) the trial court erred with its jury instructions, and (7) the cumulative effect of the alleged errors entitles him to relief. We affirm the judgments of the trial court. |
Knox | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
William J. Needham et al v. Robert G. Gerwig II
In this personal injury case, Appellants, Husband and Wife, alleged that Appellee’s dog collided with Husband’s bicycle causing him to crash and sustain injuries. The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of Appellee dog owner, finding that Appellants failed to meet their burden to show that Appellee’s dog was involved in the accident. Discerning no error, we affirm and remand. |
Hamilton | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Terrell Craft
The defendant, Terrell Craft, appeals his Shelby County Criminal Court jury convictions |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
Jessica Neal v. Patton & Taylor Enterprises, LLC
This appeal arises from a single-car accident in which the vehicle crashed into a fence, |
Shelby | Court of Appeals | |
Jason Britt v. Richard Jason Usery, et al.
The Plaintiff hired the Defendant to build a concrete foundation for his new home. The |
Henderson | Court of Appeals | |
State of Tennessee v. Jeffrey Clay Dale
The Defendant, Jeffrey Clay Dale, was convicted by a Maury County Circuit Court jury of two counts of driving under the influence, third offense, which the trial court merged. See T.C.A. §§ 55-10-401(1) (2020) (driving under the influence of an intoxicant), -401(2) (driving with a blood- or breath-alcohol concentration of 0.08% or more), 55-10-402 (a)(3)(A) (2020) (subsequently amended) (third offense driving under the influence). The trial court sentenced the Defendant to eleven months, twenty-nine days, with 140 days to be served in jail and the balance on probation. On appeal, the Defendant contends that: (1) the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions and (2) the trial court erred in allowing a law enforcement officer to testify about his observations during field sobriety testing of the Defendant. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. |
Maury | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
David Hutchins v. Cardinal Glass Industries, Et Al.
Appellant David Hutchins challenges the trial court's denial of his Motion to |
Workers Compensation Panel | ||
Tavaris D. Bledsoe v. State of Tennessee
Petitioner, Tavaris D. Bledsoe, appeals the denial of his post-conviction petition, arguing |
Shelby | Court of Criminal Appeals | |
State of Tennessee, ex rel., William Goetz v. Donel Autin, et al
The notice of appeal in this case was not timely filed. Therefore, this Court lacks |
Shelby | Court of Appeals |