APPELLATE COURT OPINIONS

The appellant, Roger Lee Fleenor, appeals the sentence imposed by the Sullivan County Criminal Court upon his plea of guilty to the offense of attempt to commit aggravated sexual battery, a class C felony. Pursuant to a negotiated plea, the appellant received a sentence of eight years as a range II offender. The manner of service of the sentence was submitted to the trial court for determination. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court denied any form of alternative sentence and ordered that the sentence be served in the Department of Correction.
The appellant now appeals this decision.

The defendant, Quantreal Underwood, was convicted of second degree murder and two counts of aggravated robbery.1 The trial court imposed a Range I, twenty-five-year sentence for second degree murder and two concurrent eight-year sentences on each count of aggravated robbery.

The defendant was convicted by jury of two counts of rape and two counts of incest. He was sentenced as a Range I, standard offender to twelve (12) years for each rape conviction and to six (6) years for each incest conviction to the custody of the Department of Correction. The trial court ordered the defendant to serve the rape convictions consecutive to each other and consecutive to prior unserved sentences but concurrent with the incest convictions. The trial court also imposed fines in the amount of $25,000 for each rape conviction and $10,000 for each incest conviction.

The defendant, Lester Lee Doyle, was convicted by a Benton County jury of driving under the influence of an intoxicant, second offense, and driving on a revoked license. The sole issue presented on appeal is whether the evidence adduced at trial is sufficient to support the jury’s verdict. We affirm the conviction.

The appellant, Hollis G. Williams (defendant), was convicted of first-degree felony murder by a jury of his peers. The State of Tennessee sought the extreme penalty of death. However, the jury set his punishment at life without the possibility of parole. The defendant presents three issues for review. He contends (a) the evidence is insufficient, as a matter of law, to support his conviction for a murder committed during an attempt to commit robbery, (b) the trial court committed error of prejudicial dimensions by ruling his two convictions for attempt to commit robbery could be used to impeach him if he opted to testify in support of his defense, and (c) the trial court committed error of prejudicial dimensions by permitting the state to introduce victim impact testimony during the sentencing hearing. After a thorough review of the record, the briefs submitted by the parties, and the law governing the issues presented for review, it is the opinion of this Court the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed.

The Defendant, John Parnell Yaugher, appeals as of right pursuant to Rule 3 of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure. The Defendant was convicted following a jury trial in Anderson County of the offense of rape of a child. On appeal, the Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the allegations in the indictment to charge an offense. Also, the Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the conviction and specifically argues that his confession was uncorroborated, that there was no proof of penetration, and that the State failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was sane at the time of the offense. Furth er, the Defendant argu es that the trial court erred in denying a motion to suppress his statement to investigators and by charging in the jury instructions the lesser grade offense of aggravated sexual battery. Finding no
error, and that the indictment and the evidence are sufficient, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The petitioner, Olen Eddie Hutchison, appeals as of right from the Campbell County Criminal Court’s denial of post-conviction relief. He was convicted in 1991 for the first degree murder of Hugh Huddleston and received the death penalty. He was also convicted of conspiracy to take a life and solicitation to commit first degreemurder for which he received a total sentence of twenty-two years. The convictions and sentences were affirmed on direct appeal. State v. Hutchison, 898 S.W.2d 161 (Tenn. 1994), cert. denied, U.S. , 116 S. Ct. 137 (1995). We affirm the denial of postconviction
relief.

On February 10, 1995, Appellant Telly Slayton was found guilty by a Shelby County Criminal Court jury of murder in the perpetration of robbery in violation of Tennessee Code Annotated Section 39-13-202(2) (Supp. 1996). The trial court ordered a sentence of life imprisonment. On appeal, Appellant raises three issues for review: (1) whether the evidence presented at trial was sufficient as a matter of law to sustain the conviction ; (2) whether the trial court erred in overruling Appellant’s motion to suppress his statement given to police officers; and (3) whether the trial court erred in admitting, over Appellant’s objection, a photograph of the victim taken while the victim was alive. After a review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The appellant, John C. Tomlinson, appeals the trial court’s dismissal of his pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus. In April 1983, the appellant was convicted in the Davidson County Criminal Court of aggravated kidnaping and two counts of robbery with a deadly weapon. For these convictions, he was sentenced to 30 years imprisonment. In December 1983, the appellant was convicted in the Wilson County Criminal Court of aggravated rape and armed robbery resulting in sentences totaling 35 years. The appellant is currently confined at the Northeast Correctional Center where he is serving an effective sentence of 65 years for the convictions from both counties. The appellant now appeals the trial court’s dismissal of his petition for writ of habeas corpus. Specifically, the appellant contends that the trial court’s summary dismissal denied him his right to due process of the law.

The petitioner, William David Clapp, appeals as of right from the Sullivan County Criminal Court’s dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. The trial court dismissed the petition, concluding that it was barred by the statute of limitations. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.