APPELLATE COURT OPINIONS

The Defendant, Michael Richard Penley, appeals from the Hamilton County Criminal
Court’s probation revocation of the effective six-year sentence he received for his guiltypleaded
convictions for misdemeanor theft, two counts of evading arrest, reckless
endangerment, driving while in possession of methamphetamine, attempted possession
with the intent to sell methamphetamine, and reckless aggravated assault. On appeal, the
Defendant contends that the trial court abused its discretion by revoking his probation and
ordering him to serve the remainder of his sentence in confinement. We affirm the
judgment of the trial court.

The Defendant, Edwin Reeves, was convicted by a Knox County Criminal Court jury of
criminally negligent homicide and possession with the intent to sell or to deliver a schedule
II controlled substance in a drug-free zone. He later pleaded guilty to a second count of
possession with the intent to sell or to deliver a schedule II controlled substance in a drugfree
zone. The trial court imposed an effective nine-year sentence. The Defendant filed a
motion to correct an illegal sentence pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure
36.1, which the trial court summarily dismissed for the failure to state a colorable claim.
On appeal, the Defendant contends that the trial court erred in denying relief. We affirm
the judgment of the trial court.

The Defendant, David Kaiser, appeals from his guilty pleaded convictions for two counts
of theft of property valued at $10,000 or more but less than $60,000, a Class C felony;
burglary, a Class D felony; theft of property valued at $2,500 or more but less than $10,000,
a Class D felony; and misdemeanor drug possession, a Class A misdemeanor. See T.C.A.
§§ 39-14-103 (2018) (theft of property); 39-14-105 (2018) (grading of theft); 39-13-1002
(Supp. 2021) (burglary); 39-17-418 (2018) (misdemeanor drug possession). The
Defendant agreed to an effective ten-year sentence as a Range II offender, with the manner
of service to be determined by the trial court. On appeal, the Defendant contends that the
court erred by denying his request for alternative sentencing. We affirm the judgments of
the trial court.

After being convicted by a jury of multiple drug charges, possession of a firearm during the commission of or attempt to commit a dangerous felony, and three alternative counts of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, Torsaunt Lamont Shanklin, Petitioner, was sentenced to an effective sentence of thirty-five years in incarceration.  His direct appeal challenging the denial of a motion to suppress was unsuccessful.  State v. Shanklin, No. M2019-01896-CCA-R3-CD, 2021 WL 1082043, at *1 (Tenn. Crim. App. Mar. 22, 2021), perm. app. denied (Tenn. May 12, 2021).  Petitioner sought post-conviction relief primarily based on ineffective assistance of counsel. After a hearing, the post-conviction court denied relief.  We affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

Petitioner, Donald K. Moore, Jr., appeals the summary dismissal of his petitions seeking post-conviction relief from his 1996 convictions for first degree murder and especially aggravated robbery in case number 96-C-1428 and second degree murder in case number 96-C-1423, for which he was sentenced to life, twenty years, and twenty-one years’ incarceration, respectively. The post-conviction court concluded that, even if Petitioner’s allegations were taken as true, he would not be entitled to relief and summarily dismissed the petitions. Discerning no error, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

The Defendant, Grover Beverly, was convicted by a Sevier County jury of two counts of rape of a child, for which he received an effective sentence of eighty years' incarceration. On appeal, the Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the convicting evidence. Following our review of the record, we affirm the judgments of the trial court. 

The Defendant, Nathan David Bassett, pled guilty in the Madison County Circuit Court to theft of property valued $10,000 or more. Pursuant to the plea agreement, he received a five-year sentence as a Range I, standard offender with the trial court to determine the manner of service of the sentence. After a sentencing hearing, the trial court ordered that the Defendant serve the sentence in confinement. On appeal, the Defendant contends that the trial court abused its discretion by denying a sentence alternative to confinement. Based on our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Defendant, David Edward Seickendick, appeals the judgment of the Cumberland County Criminal Court revoking his probation and ordering him to serve the balance of his previously ordered probationary sentence in confinement. On appeal, Defendant argues that the trial court abused its discretion by failing to consider Defendant’s medical conditions in revoking his probation and ordering him to serve his original sentence. After review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The Petitioner, Rickius Grant, appeals the Madison County Circuit Court’s denial of his petition for post-conviction relief from his convictions for two counts of attempting to traffic a person for a commercial sex act and resulting concurrent six-year sentences. On appeal, he contends that the post-conviction court erred by finding that his petition was barred by the statute of limitations because due process required that the statute of limitations be tolled. Based upon our review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

The pro se Defendant, Darrell E. Nance,1 appeals from the trial court’s summary dismissal
of his Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 36.1 motion to correct an illegal sentence.
Specifically, the Defendant argues that (1) the trial court erred in concluding that his
sentence of life imprisonment was legal, (2) the State’s motion to dismiss his motion was
untimely, and (3) the trial court erred in declining to appoint counsel and hold a hearing on
his motion. Because we conclude that the Defendant’s notice of appeal was untimely filed
and that the interest of justice does not require waiver of the timely filing requirement, we
dismiss the appeal.

The Defendant, Forrest Scott Evans, pled guilty to the offense of aggravated assault, and the trial court sentenced him to a term of seven years and six months. The court suspended the sentence and placed the Defendant on probation. Thereafter, the Defendant committed new crimes in Virginia. When the Defendant was returned to Tennessee, the trial court revoked the suspended sentence and ordered him to serve it in full. The Defendant appeals, arguing that a full revocation was an abuse of discretion. Upon our review, we respectfully disagree and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

The Defendant, James R. Holley, appeals the Henderson County Circuit Court’s denial of his request for alternative sentencing after his guilty pleas to eight counts involving drugs, weapons, and traffic offenses. Based on our review, we conclude that the Defendant failed to provide this court with an adequate appellate record. Accordingly, his appeal is dismissed.

The Defendant, Roger Bridges, 1 was convicted by a Shelby County Criminal Court jury of three counts of aggravated sexual battery, a Class B felony; sexual battery, a Class E felony; rape, a Class B felony; and rape of a child, a Class A felony, and was sentenced by the trial court to an effective term of fifty-one years at 100% in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The four victims involved were three sisters and their female first cousin, and the offenses occurred over a two-month period that culminated on June 12, 2018, when one of the three sisters divulged the abuse to her father, who called the police. On appeal, the Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the convicting evidence and argues that the State violated Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S 83 (1973), “by failing to produce information concerning the pending investigation of a male family member for sexual abuse crimes against some of the same family group.”2 Based on our review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

In 1996, the Petitioner, Alvin Dean Shaver, pled guilty to two counts of first degree murder and was sentenced to concurrent terms of life without the possibility of parole. In 2024, the Petitioner applied for a writ of habeas corpus. He alleged that the trial court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to hear and adjudicate the charges because the statute pursuant to which he was convicted did not have the constitutionally required style, “Be it enacted by the General Assembly of the State of Tennessee.” The habeas corpus court summarily dismissed the application for the writ, and the Petitioner appealed. Upon our review, we respectfully affirm the judgment of the habeas corpus court.

A Dyer County jury found the Defendant, Daniel McCaig, guilty of unlawfully possessing methamphetamine and a firearm. The trial court imposed a total effective sentence of twenty-six years to be served in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the Defendant asserts that the evidence is legally insufficient to support his convictions. He also argues that the trial court erred by denying his right to represent himself and imposing consecutive sentences. Upon our review, we respectfully disagree and affirm the trial court’s judgments.

Defendant, Detarus Brown, appeals from the Maury County Circuit Court’s order partially denying his motion to correct his sentence, and Defendant contends that the trial court should have treated his motion as a petition for post-conviction relief. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Defendant, Kurt Franklin Luna, was convicted after a jury trial of driving without a license, driving an unregistered vehicle, and violation of the financial responsibility law. The trial court sentenced him to serve forty-eight hours in the county jail. On appeal, Defendant raises a variety of claims. After a thorough review of the record, we conclude that Defendant has waived his issues for failure to create an adequate record and failure to comply with the Rules of Appellate Procedure.

The Defendant, Marlos LeKeith Tipton, appeals from his convictions for vehicular homicide and speeding following a bench trial. Specifically, the Defendant contends that he was deprived of a fair trial based on the trial court’s denial of funding for a defense expert in vehicle collisions. He further argues that the proof was insufficient to support his conviction of vehicular homicide based upon reckless conduct predicated on excessive speed alone. After review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

A Davidson County jury convicted the Defendant, Damon Cordell Parson, of three counts of selling .5 grams or more of cocaine, and the trial court sentenced him to a total effective sentence of twelve years, to be served consecutively to a previous sentence. On appeal, the Defendant contends that the trial court erred when it admitted audio recordings of the drug transactions and that, without the recordings, the evidence is insufficient to convict him. He further contends that the trial court erred when it sentenced him because it improperly sentenced him to the maximum sentence within his applicable sentencing range and did not make proper considerations with regard to alternative sentencing. After review, we affirm the trial court’s judgments.

A Knox County jury convicted Defendant, D’tearius Carvell Southern, of second degree murder, aggravated assault, two counts of reckless endangerment with a deadly weapon, tampering with evidence, and being a felon in possession of a firearm. Defendant received an effective sentence of twenty-three years to be served in confinement. On appeal, Defendant contends that the evidence was not sufficient to support his conviction for second degree murder and that the trial court erred by declining to instruct the jury that Defendant had no duty to retreat before using deadly force as part of the self-defense instruction. After review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

A Knox County Jury convicted the Petitioner, James Theodore Menard, of one count of rape of a child, one count of exhibition of pictures depicting sexual conduct harmful to a minor, and two counts of aggravated sexual battery.  The trial court imposed an effective sentence of forty-two years in the Tennessee Department of Correction.  On appeal, this court affirmed the trial court, and our supreme court denied review.  State v. Menard, No.  E2021-00164-CCA-R3-CD,  2022 WL 1498767, at * 1 (Tenn. Crim. App. May 12, 2022), perm. app. denied (Tenn. Sept. 9, 2022).  The Petitioner filed for post-conviction relief, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel.  After a hearing, the post-conviction court denied relief.  On appeal, the Petitioner maintains that his attorney was ineffective for failing to disclose a plea offer and failing to review discovery.  After review, we affirm the post-conviction court's judgment.

In accordance with the reasoning set forth in this court’s recent opinion in Jarrett v. State, I would dismiss Petitioner’s appeal due to his failure to file a timely notice of appeal and his failure to acknowledge that his notice of appeal is untimely or otherwise request that this court accept his late-filed notice of appeal.

The Defendants, Jeffrey Pete Fautt and Robin Leanne Osborne, appeal their convictions for selling one-half gram or more of methamphetamine. They argue the evidence was insufficient to support the guilty verdicts because officers’ testimony was inconsistent, unreliable, and uncorroborated. Specifically, they assert that the controlled purchases were not captured by audio and video recordings, the searches of the confidential informant’s vehicle were not recorded, and officers did not deploy a canine unit during the searches of the informant’s vehicle. The Defendants additionally contend that Defendant Osborne’s testimony should have been accredited over the confidential informant’s testimony. The State avers that the testimony, video evidence, and laboratory results introduced at trial were sufficient to support the jury’s verdicts. Following our review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

The Defendant, Brandon Eugene Beard, pleaded guilty to three counts of aggravated assault and one count of being a felon in possession of a handgun.  After the plea, but before the sentencing hearing, the State filed a notice to seek enhanced punishment offering exhibits showing that the Defendant qualified as a Range II offender and asking the court to impose consecutive sentences and the maximum sentence.  After the hearing, the trial court sentenced the Defendant as a Range II offender to eighteen years for each of the assault convictions to be served concurrently at 85% and to ten years for the handgun conviction to be served at 35% and consecutively to the assault sentences, for a total effective sentence of twenty-eight years.  On appeal, the Defendant contends that the trial court erred when it ordered partial consecutive sentencing and when it considered the State's notice to seek enhanced punishment, which the State filed after he pleaded guilty.  After review, we affirm the trial court's judgments. 

The defendant, Montreal Portis Robinson, appeals the twenty-five-year sentence imposed by the trial court upon resentencing for his second-degree murder conviction arguing the trial court imposed an excessive sentence. Upon our review of the record and applicable law, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. However, our review has revealed a possible issue as to the sentences imposed in Counts 5 and 6, and we remand for the trial court to make further findings.