APPELLATE COURT OPINIONS

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.

Petitioner, Guary Wallace, appeals the post-conviction court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief in which he challenged his convictions for attempted first degree murder, especially aggravated robbery, two counts of aggravated robbery, and two counts of aggravated assault and his effective 100-year sentence. On appeal, Petitioner contends that the prosecutor made improper comments during closing arguments at trial and that trial counsel was ineffective in failing to object to the prosecutor’s comments. Because Petitioner filed an untimely notice of appeal, we dismiss the appeal.

The Defendant, Clyde E. Willis, was convicted by a Madison County Circuit Court jury of trafficking for a commercial sex act from a law enforcement officer posing as a minor, a Class B felony; patronizing prostitution from a law enforcement officer posing as a minor, a Class A misdemeanor; and solicitation of a law enforcement officer posing as a minor to commit aggravated statutory rape, a Class D felony. See T.C.A. §§ 39-13-309(a)(3) (Supp. 2019) (subsequently amended) (trafficking for a commercial sex act from a law enforcement officer posing as a minor), 39-13-514(a)(2) (Supp. 2019) (subsequently amended) (patronizing prostitution from a law enforcement officer), 39-13-528(a)(7) (2018) (solicitation of a law enforcement officer posing as a minor to commit statutory rape). The trial court merged the patronizing prostitution conviction with the trafficking conviction and sentenced the Defendant to an effective nine-year sentence in the Department of Correction. On appeal, the Defendant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction of trafficking for a commercial sex act and that his convictions for patronizing prosecution from a law enforcement officer posing as a minor and for solicitation for a commercial sex act from a law enforcement officer posing as a minor violate double jeopardy and must be merged. Because we agree that the evidence is insufficient to support the trafficking conviction, we vacate the conviction, reverse the judgment, and dismiss the charge. We affirm the Defendant’s remaining convictions, and we remand for completion of sentencing for the patronizing prostitution conviction and entry of an amended judgment.

I concur with my colleagues’ reasoning and judgment in affirming Defendant’s convictions in Counts 2 and 3 for patronizing prostitution from a law enforcement officer posing as a minor and solicitation of a law enforcement officer posing as a minor to commit aggravated statutory rape. I depart, however, from the majority’s opinion regarding the sufficiency of the evidence to support Defendant’s conviction in Count 1. I dissent on this point alone.

In 2010, a Washington County jury found Petitioner, Howard Hawk Willis, guilty of two
counts of premeditated first degree murder and one count of felony murder in the
perpetration of a kidnapping. The jury sentenced Petitioner to death on each conviction.1
After his convictions and sentences were affirmed by the Tennessee Supreme Court on
direct appeal, Petitioner sought post-conviction relief. The post-conviction court denied
relief after extensive hearings. On appeal, Petitioner raises numerous arguments assailing
his convictions and sentences based primarily on ineffective assistance of counsel as well
as several stand-alone claims. After a thorough review of the record, the applicable law,
the parties’ briefs, and oral arguments, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

A Davidson County jury convicted Defendant, Timothy Eugene Sanders, of two counts of carjacking and one count of robbery.  Defendant contends on appeal that the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions and that the trial court failed to properly charge the jury regarding use of force.  We find all of Defendant’s issues waived for insufficient briefing and therefore affirm the judgments of the trial court.

The pro se Defendant, Kyle J. Frey, was convicted by a Williamson County jury of driving under the influence of an intoxicant (DUI); DUI per se; resisting arrest; and speeding. See T.C.A. §§ 55-10-401 (DUI) (2024); 39-16-602(a) (2018) (resisting arrest); 55-8-152 (Supp. 2021) (subsequently amended) (speeding). The trial court merged the DUI convictions. The Defendant received an effective sentence of eleven months and twenty-nine days, suspended to supervised probation after service of sixty days’ incarceration. On appeal, the Defendant alleges that the trial court did not have subject matter jurisdiction. We conclude that the Defendant’s brief fails to comply with Tennessee Rule of Appellate Procedure 27 and Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals Rule 10(b) and that the appellate record is incomplete. See T.R.A.P. 24(b). Accordingly, the Defendant’s issues are waived, and his appeal is dismissed.

The Defendant, Jonathan Cole Treadway, appeals his jury conviction of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, for which he received a Range II sentence of eighteen years' incarceration. In this appeal, the Defendant argues that the evidence was insufficient to support his convictionand that the trial court erred in its weighing of the enhancement and mitigating factors during sentencing. Following our reivew, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. 

A Dickson County jury convicted the Defendant, Jimmy Uhl, of aggravated sexual battery, and the trial court sentenced him to twelve years of incarceration. On appeal, the Defendant contends that the trial court erred when it denied his motion for a mistrial and when it sentenced him. Following our review, we affirm the trial court’s judgment. We remand to the trial court to make the requisite findings with respect to the fine imposed by the jury.

The Petitioner, Morris Jason Pepper, was convicted of first degree premeditated murder in 2000 and was sentenced to life imprisonment. In 2022, the Petitioner, with the assistance of counsel, filed a motion to reopen his petition for post-conviction relief, arguing that new scientific evidence established his actual innocence, referencing issues of inconsistent testimony, chain of custody, and the existence of alibi witnesses. He simultaneously filed a petition requesting touch DNA analysis of the several shotgun shells found at the murder scene and in the front yard of his home for the possible presence of either canine DNA or his codefendant’s DNA, contending that analysis was pertinent to answer the question of who or what might have touched the shells. A hearing was held on the Petitioner’s motion to reopen and his DNA petition, following which the post-conviction court denied relief in a single order. The Petitioner now appeals that decision, and he also requests relief via the doctrine of plain error due to the possible existence of a recording of his police interview and due to the destruction of evidence. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

A Decatur County jury convicted Jason David Baine, Defendant, of two counts of assault and one count of reckless endangerment with a deadly weapon. He received an effective sentence of two years of incarceration to be served at a rate of at least thirty percent. On appeal, Defendant contends the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions. After review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Came the Defendant, Richard P. Nielsen, Jr., pro se, and also came the Attorney General on behalf of the State of Tennessee, and this case was heard on the record on appeal from the Criminal Court for Knox County, and up0on consideration thereof, this Court is of the opinion that there is no error in the judgment of the trial court.

A Montgomery County jury convicted the Defendant, Timothy Elijah Ogburn, of one count of first degree premeditated murder, two counts of attempted first degree murder, and two counts of employing a firearm during the commission of a dangerous felony. After a sentencing hearing, the trial court imposed a life sentence for the first degree murder conviction, forty years for each attempted murder conviction, and ten years for each employing a firearm during the commission of a dangerous felony conviction. The trial court ordered the sentences to run consecutively to one another for an effective sentence of life plus 100 years. On appeal, the Defendant asserts that: (1) the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions; (2) the trial court’s sentence was excessive; (3) the trial court erred by not granting a new trial based on newly discovered evidence; and (4) the trial court erred by issuing a material witness bond for Devion Lisenby. After review, we affirm the trial court’s judgments.

Defendants, Ashley Ledford and Brandon Stepp, were convicted by a Campbell County jury of two counts of aggravated child abuse and neglect of a child under the age of eight resulting in serious bodily injury. The trial court imposed effective twenty-one-year sentences for each Defendant. On appeal, Defendants argue that the evidence was insufficient to support their convictions, that the trial court erred by admitting the victim’s out-of-court statements and by consolidating Defendants’ cases, and that the trial court abused its discretion in sentencing Defendants. Defendants also assert that they are entitled to relief under the cumulative error doctrine. Upon our review of the entire record, the briefs of the parties, and the applicable law, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

The Petitioner, Jamie P. Dennis, appeals from the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief, wherein he challenged his convictions for attempted rape of a child and attempted incest. On appeal, he argues that the post-conviction court erred in finding that the Petitioner’s trial counsel and appellate counsel provided him with effective assistance of counsel. The Petitioner bases his ineffectiveness claims on trial counsel’s failure to present a specific defense related to criminal attempt as a lesser included offense, failure to request reclassification of his prior conviction offenses to establish the appropriate sentencing range, and appellate counsel’s failure to raise the same issues on direct appeal. After review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

James Lee Simmons, Jr., Defendant, pleaded guilty to possession of 0.5 grams or more of methamphetamine with intent to sell, possession of drug paraphernalia, violation of the registration law, and resisting arrest. Pursuant to a plea agreement, the manner of service of Defendant’s nine-year sentence was to be determined by the trial court. Following a sentencing hearing, the court ordered the sentence to be served in confinement. Defendant appeals arguing that the trial court erred in denying him probation. Discerning no error, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Petitioner, Eric Martell Small, appeals as of right from the Tipton County Circuit Court’s denial of his petition for post-conviction relief in which he claimed that he received ineffective assistance of counsel and that his guilty plea was coerced, involuntary, and unknowing. Following our review, we affirm.

Following a jury trial, the Defendant, James Allen Worley, challenges his convictions and sentences for four counts of rape of a child and one count of attempted rape of a child on multiple statutory and constitutional grounds. Specifically, the Defendant contends that the trial court erred by 1) admitting the forensic interview of the child victim on the grounds of the forensic interviewer’s lack of requisite experience and improper authentication by the victim, 2) denying the Defendant’s motion to suppress his statements to law enforcement on the ground that they occurred during an impermissibly lengthy warrantless detainment, and 3) excessively sentencing the Defendant to consecutive terms on all counts. After a thorough review of the record and consideration of the parties’ arguments, we remand the case to the trial court for entry of corrected judgment forms in counts 1 through 5. In all other respects, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

The defendant, Russell Lenard, appeals the order of the trial court revoking his probation and ordering him to serve the remainder of his six-year sentence in confinement.  Upon our review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the revocation and the disposition of the defendant's probation.

Defendant, Timothy Ronald Cunningham, appeals his convictions for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, aggravated assault while under an order of protection, reckless endangerment with a deadly weapon, and domestic assault. The trial court imposed an effective sentence of ten years of confinement. On appeal, Defendant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support the convictions. After review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Anthony M. Standifer (“Defendant”) filed an application for judicial diversion and entered a guilty plea to Class C felony2 possession of a Schedule I controlled substance in violation of Tennessee Code Annotated section 39-17-417. On December 10, 2015, the trial court entered a probation order deferring entry of judgment pending Defendant’s successful completion of one year of supervised probation and three years of unsupervised probation. Following a June 28, 2023 probation revocation hearing, the trial court found that Defendant violated the conditions of probation. The trial court revoked probation, terminated judicial diversion, and without a sentencing hearing sentenced Defendant. The court then entered a judgment of conviction finding Defendant guilty of Class C felony “attempt poss. Sch. I controlled with intent to” and sentenced Defendant to serve three years in confinement. Upon review, we affirm the termination of judicial diversion but reverse the judgment finding Defendant guilty of attempted possession of a Schedule I controlled substance with intent to manufacture, deliver, or sell; an offense to which Defendant did not plead guilty. We remand the case to the trial court for entry of a corrected judgment finding Defendant guilty of Class A misdemeanor possession of controlled substance and for sentencing of Defendant for that offense.

A Campbell County jury convicted Defendant, Anthony Wayne Foust, of theft of property valued at $2,500 or more, and the trial court sentenced him to twelve years of incarceration to be served as a career offender at 60 percent service. On appeal, Defendant contends that (1) the State failed to disclose evidence in violation of Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963); (2) the State failed to preserve evidence in violation State v. Ferguson, 2 S.W.3d 912 (Tenn. 1999); and (3) the trial court erred in limiting Defendant’s closing argument. Upon review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Defendant, Christopher Hinson, appeals the trial court’s revocation of his probation and reinstatement of his original sentence in confinement. Defendant argues that the trial court erred when it ordered him to serve his sentence because it failed to consider any consequences other than a full revocation and placed no findings or reasons for its decision on the record. Upon review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.