Please enter some keywords to search.
| Oliver Valentine
W1999-01293-COA-R3-CV
This is a termination of parental rights case. A twenty-one month old boy was removed from his parents' home after the mother beat him with a belt, leaving bruises on his back, chest, head, and face. Three and a half years later, after the parents had failed to satisfy the conditions in the son's plan of care, the Department of Children's Services filed a petition to terminate their parental rights. The Juvenile Court for Shelby County terminated the mother's and father's parental rights. The mother and father appeal, arguing that the Tennessee Constitution prohibits a non-attorney, elected juvenile court judge from appointing a special judge, who is an attorney but not elected, to hear a termination of parental rights case. They also argue that there is not clear and convincing evidence to support the termination of their parental rights. We affirm, finding that the Tennessee Constitution does not prevent an elected, non-attorney juvenile court judge from appointing a juvenile court referee, who is an attorney but not elected, to hear cases involving the termination of parental rights, and that there is clear and convincing evidence to support the termination of parental rights in this case.
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Originating Judge:George E. Blancett |
Shelby County | Court of Appeals | 10/18/00 | |
| James Dubose vs. State
M2000-00478-CCA-R3-CD
The petitioner, James DuBose, was convicted by a jury in the Williamson County Circuit Court of one count of first degree felony murder with the underlying felony being aggravated child abuse. The trial court sentenced the petitioner to life imprisonment in the Tennessee Department of Correction. This court and the Tennessee Supreme Court affirmed the petitioner's conviction. The petitioner subsequently filed a petition for post-conviction relief. After a hearing, the post-conviction court denied the petitioner's request for relief. On appeal, the petitioner raises the following issues for our review: (1) whether the State engaged in prosecutorial misconduct during the course of the petitioner's trial; (2) whether petitioner's trial counsel provided ineffective assistance of counsel; (3) whether the trial court erred in failing to give curative jury instructions; and (4) whether the petitioner was charged pursuant to a faulty indictment. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Originating Judge:Donald P. Harris |
Williamson County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 10/18/00 | |
| State vs. Richard M. Far, Jr.
M1999-01998-CCA-R3-CD
Defendant, Richard M. Far, Jr., was convicted by a Rutherford County jury of Class D forgery of a document valued at more than $1,000. Subsequently, the trial court sentenced Defendant as a Range III persistent offender to ten (10) years to be served consecutively to Defendant's sentence in an arson case (F-45893). Defendant raises two issues on appeal: 1) whether the trial court erred in excluding Defendant from his trial and sentencing hearing and 2) whether the trial court properly considered the sentencing guidelines in sentencing Defendant. After a review of the record, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand this matter for a new trial.
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Originating Judge:James K. Clayton, Jr. |
Rutherford County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 10/18/00 | |
| Peltz vs. Peltz
M1999-02299-COA-R3-CV
The issue on appeal is whether a notary was negligent when she attached her certificate to a forged signature on a deed. The Chancery Court of Williamson County held that she was not. We affirm.
Authoring Judge: Judge Ben H. Cantrell
Originating Judge:Russell Heldman |
Williamson County | Court of Appeals | 10/18/00 | |
| State vs. Andre L. Mayfield
M1999-02415-CCA-R3-CD
In 1999, the Defendant was tried by a Davidson County jury and found guilty of aggravated robbery, aggravated rape, rape, and two counts of aggravated kidnapping for crimes perpetrated on two victims. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced the Defendant to an effective sentence of fifty years. In this appeal as of right, the Defendant argues that (1) the trial court erred by failing to sever the offenses against one victim from those against the second victim; (2) the trial court erred by failing to admonish the jury not to view, listen to, or read any news coverage of the case during trial; (3) the trial court erred by failing to grant his two motions for a mistrial; (4) the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support his convictions; (5) the trial court erred by allowing the State to introduce evidence of the age of one victim; (6) the trial court erred by allowing into evidence altered documents and by instructing the jury that the documents were altered to remove inadmissible evidence; (7) the trial court erred by allowing into evidence inadmissible hearsay statements; (8) the trial court erred by refusing to instruct the jury on lesser-included offenses requested by the defense; and (9) the trial court sentenced him improperly. Having thoroughly reviewed the record in this case, we affirm the judgment of the trial court, as modified to indicate that the Defendant was sentenced as a Range II Multiple Rapist for the rape conviction.
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Originating Judge:Seth W. Norman |
Davidson County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 10/18/00 | |
| State vs. Nicholas Williams
M1999-00780-CCA-R3-CD
In 1998, the Giles County Grand Jury indicted the Defendant for one count of statutory rape and ten counts of sexual battery. In 1999, a Giles County jury tried the Defendant and found him guilty of one count of statutory rape and five counts of sexual battery. Following a hearing, the trial court sentenced the Defendant to two years incarceration for each conviction and ordered that five of the six sentences be served consecutively, resulting in an effective sentence of ten years. The Defendant now appeals as of right, arguing (1) that the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support his convictions for sexual battery; (2) that the trial court erred by consolidating all counts for trial; and (3) that he was improperly sentenced. We conclude that the evidence is insufficient as to one count of sexual battery and thus reverse one of the Defendant's convictions for sexual battery. In addition, we conclude that the trial court erred by consolidating all counts for trial, but conclude that this error was harmless. Finally, following our reversal of the sexual battery conviction in case 8652, count one, with a two-year sentence, and a de novo review of the remaining sentences imposed by the trial court, we conclude that an effective sentence of eight years in the Tennessee Department of Corrections is appropriate.
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Originating Judge:Jim T. Hamilton |
Giles County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 10/18/00 | |
| State vs. Amelia Kay Stem
M2000-00600-CCA-R3-CD
The appellant, Amelia Kay Stem, entered a plea of nolo contendere in the Lawrence County Circuit Court to one count of second degree murder. The trial court sentenced the appellant to twenty-five years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The appellant raises the following issue(s) for our review: whether the trial court erred in sentencing the appellant by incorrectly applying enhancement factors, by failing to apply mitigating factors, and by neglecting to make specific findings of fact on the record. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Originating Judge:Stella L. Hargrove |
Lawrence County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 10/18/00 | |
| Judy Pennington vs. Frank Pennington
W2000-00568-COA-R3-CV
This appeal arises from a divorce proceeding. The Chancery Court of Madison County granted the Appellee a divorce on the grounds of inappropriate marital conduct and adultery. The trial court calculated child support based on the Appellant's average income prior to his first incarceration. In lieu of child support payments, the trial court awarded the Appellee an office building titled solely in her name. The trial court also awarded the Appellee $5,000.00 as alimony in solido to help defray her attorney's fees and expenses but declined to award periodic or rehabilitative alimony due to the trial court's division of marital property.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Originating Judge:Joe C. Morris |
Madison County | Court of Appeals | 10/18/00 | |
| State vs. John Charles Johnson
M2000-00529-CCA-R3-CD
Defendant John Charles Johnson was convicted by a Davidson County jury of second degree murder, facilitation of aggravated kidnapping, and especially aggravated robbery. The trial court sentenced Defendant to twenty-five years for second degree murder, five years for facilitation of aggravated kidnapping, and twenty years for especially aggravated robbery. The trial court further ordered that Defendant's sentences for second degree murder and facilitation of aggravated kidnapping be served consecutive to each other and concurrent with Defendant's sentence for especially aggravated robbery, resulting in an effective sentence of thirty years. Defendant raises the following issues in this appeal: (1) whether the evidence was sufficient to support his three convictions; (2) whether the trial court erred in not granting Defendant's motion for judgment of acquittal on the ground that the testimony of a co-defendant was uncorroborated; (3) whether the trial court erred in not allowing Defendant to play a tape containing exculpatory statements; (4) whether the trial court erred by failing to charge the lesser-included offenses of voluntary manslaughter and facilitation to commit voluntary manslaughter; and (5) whether the length of the sentences imposed by the trial court were proper. Following a review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court concerning Defendant's convictions and the lengths of Defendant's sentences. We reverse the trial court's order of consecutive sentencing and remand for a new hearing solely on the issue of concurrent or consecutive sentencing.
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Originating Judge:J. Randall Wyatt, Jr. |
Davidson County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 10/18/00 | |
| Edward Tuggle vs. AMISUB
W1999-02444-COA-R3-CV
Patient sued hospital for injuries sustained when she fell after hospital personnel failed to respond to her call for assistance to go to the bathroom. Patient went to the bathroom without incident and then decided to bathe her feet while she was out of bed. Patient filled a pan of water and sat in a chair bathing her feet when the telephone rang. When she got up to answer the telephone across the room, her wet feet slipped on the floor, and she fell, sustaining injuries. The trial court granted hospital summary judgment, and patient has appealed.
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Originating Judge:Kay S. Robilio |
Shelby County | Court of Appeals | 10/18/00 | |
| Shirley Marcum vs. Michael Trippett
W1999-00255-COA-R3-CV
This appeal involves the interpretation of a marital dissolution agreement pertaining to a division of marital property. The trial court interpreted the agreement to require Husband to begin paying $1,200.00 per month to Wife for her interest in the marital property, an insurance agency. Husband has appealed.
Authoring Judge: Judge W. Frank Crawford
Originating Judge:Wyeth Chandler |
Shelby County | Court of Appeals | 10/18/00 | |
| State vs. Randy Lee Bowers
E2000-00585-CCA-R3-CD
After entering guilty pleas to possession of a Schedule VI controlled substance (marijuana); driving under the influence, third offense; and driving while his license was revoked, after a second or subsequent conviction for driving under the influence, the Criminal Court for Sullivan County conducted a sentencing hearing and then sentenced the defendant. The defendant contends that the trial court erred in ordering consecutive sentences and in failing to place him on probation after the service of the minimum sentence of one hundred-twenty days for DUI third offense. After careful review, we interpret the defendant's sentence to be three hundred-eighteen (318) days of full incarceration followed by four hundred fifty-five (455) days on supervised probation. Further, we affirm the denial of alternative sentencing.
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Originating Judge:R. Jerry Beck |
Sullivan County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 10/17/00 | |
| State vs. Christopher Knighton
E2000-00746-CCA-R3-CD
The defendant was convicted by a jury of aggravated rape, aggravated burglary and theft. In his direct appeal, he presents six issues for review. Three of those issues concern the jury selection process, one issue is an evidentiary issue, and the other issues concern the sufficiency of the indictment and the sufficiency of the evidence. With respect to the jury selection process, we hold: the failure to raise the issue of a "Batson violation" during jury selection constitutes a waiver of that issue; the failure to swear the jury before voir dire is not reversible error unless it is shown that a juror did not truthfully answer the questions as the result of not being sworn; and the trial court did not abuse his discretion in refusing to dismiss two jurors for cause. Additionally, we hold that felony drug crimes are relevant to the issue of credibility under Tenn.R Evid. 609, and that under the facts of this case, the unfair prejudicial effect did not outweigh the probative value of the impeaching convictions. Finally, we hold that the indictment charging the defendant with aggravated rape was legally sufficient, and that the evidence was sufficient to support the verdict of the jury for that offense.
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Acree
Originating Judge:D. Kelly Thomas, Jr. |
Blount County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 10/17/00 | |
| State vs. Nicholas Robert Brown
E1999-00110-CCA-R3-CD
The Defendant, Nicholas Roberts Brown, pleaded guilty to one count of statutory rape. Pursuant to his plea agreement, he received a sentence of one year, with the manner of service of the sentence to be determined by the trial court. After a sentencing hearing, the Defendant was ordered to serve sixty days in jail, with the remainder of his sentence to be served in community corrections. In this appeal as of right, the Defendant argues that he should have been placed on immediate probation. We hold that the Defendant failed to establish his suitability for full probation, but we modify the his sentence to sixty days incarceration followed by supervised probation because the Defendant is statutorily ineligible to participate in the community corrections program. The case is remanded for the trial court to determine the conditions of probation.
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Originating Judge:Richard R. Vance |
Sevier County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 10/17/00 | |
| Phyllis McBride vs. State
M2000-00034-CCA-R3-PC
The Petitioner, Phyllis McBride, was convicted by a Rutherford County jury of first degree murder. On appeal, this Court affirmed the conviction. The Petitioner filed an application for permission to appeal to the Tennessee Supreme Court which was denied. The Petitioner then filed a petition for post-conviction relief. Following a hearing, the petition was dismissed. The Petitioner now appeals the trial court's denial of post-conviction relief. Finding no error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Originating Judge:James K. Clayton, Jr. |
Rutherford County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 10/17/00 | |
| Rebecca Cooper vs. Porter Cooper
W1999-01450-COA-R3-CV
This appeal arises from a dispute over a term in a Property Settlement Agreement that obligated Mr. Cooper to pay for his son's college education. Ms. Cooper sought reimbursement for various expenses totaling over $16,000.00 associated with her son's first year of college at Mississippi State University. Mr. Cooper argues that he should be liable only for the cost of tuition, fees, and books. For the following reasons, we affirm as modified and remand.
Authoring Judge: Presiding Judge Alan E. Highers
Originating Judge:Joe C. Morris |
Chester County | Court of Appeals | 10/17/00 | |
| State vs. Carlos Demetrius Harris
E2000-00718-CCA-R3-CD
The Defendant, Carlos Demetrius Harris, appeals as of right from his reckless homicide conviction. On appeal, he presents the following six issues: (1) whether the trial court erred by granting the State's motion to amend the indictment from voluntary manslaughter to reckless homicide; (2) whether the trial court erred by allowing inadmissible items into evidence; (3) whether the trial court erred by not allowing testimony by the Hamilton County Medical Examiner that an ordinary person would be unaware that one blow to the head would cause death; (4) whether the trial court erred by granting the State's jury instruction request regarding causation and intent; (5) whether the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction; and (6) whether the trial court erred by sentencing the Defendant to a term of six years and by denying the Defendant alternative sentencing. We find no reversible error; accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Originating Judge:Stephen M. Bevil |
Hamilton County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 10/17/00 | |
| Ronald Devaney v. City of Rockwood and Tml Risk
1998-00780-WC-R3-CV
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tennessee Code Annotated _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The trial court found the suit barred by the statue of limitations, and granted summary judgment in favor the City of Rockwood and TML Risk Management Pool, Public Risk Services, Inc. We affirm.
Authoring Judge: Howell N. Peoples, Special Judge
Originating Judge:Frank V. Williams, Chancellor |
Knox County | Workers Compensation Panel | 10/17/00 | |
| Willie Grace Green v. Atrium Memorial Surgery
E1999-00730-WC-R3-CV
This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tennessee Code Annotated _ 5-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The appellant, Atrium Memorial Surgery Center (hereafter "Atrium Memorial"), appeals an award of thirty-five percent disability to the body as a whole to Willie Grace Green. Appellant contends the trial court erred (1) in finding that the employee's underlying preexisting condition was advanced or progressed by her work, and (2) in awarding permanent partial disability benefits in any amount. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Authoring Judge: Peoples, Sp. J.
Originating Judge:Jeffrey Stewart, Chancellor |
Knox County | Workers Compensation Panel | 10/17/00 | |
| State vs. Lester Parker
E2000-00282-CCA-R3-CD
The defendant appeals from a jury trial conviction for criminal attempt to possess Schedule II controlled substance with intent to deliver. In the appeal, the defendant alleges that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury's verdict, the trial court erred in allowing a positive drug test of the defendant to be admitted into evidence, and the trial court erred in denying the defendant's motion to remand the case to the General Sessions Court for a preliminary hearing. We conclude that the issues presented for appeal are without merit and affirm the trial court.
Authoring Judge: Judge William B. Acree
Originating Judge:D. Kelly Thomas, Jr. |
Blount County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 10/17/00 | |
| State vs. Larry Coulter
M1999-00784-CCA-R3-CD
The appellant, Larry Coulter, appeals his conviction by a jury in the Rutherford County Circuit Court of one count of first degree premeditated murder. For his offense, the appellant received a sentence of life imprisonment in the Tennessee Department of Correction. In this appeal, the appellant presents the following issues for our review: (1) whether the trial court erred in failing to disqualify the office of the District Attorney General for the Sixteenth Judicial District from participating in the appellant's case; (2) whether the trial court erred in denying the appellant's pre-trial motion to suppress a statement that he made to officers of the La Vergne Police Department following his offense; (3) whether the trial court erred in denying the appellant's pre-trial motion to suppress the fruits of a warrantless search of his home by officers of the La Vergne Police Department; (4) whether the trial court erred in denying the appellant's pre-trial motion to exclude from evidence notes and letters written by the appellant to the victim prior to this offense; (5) whether the trial court erred in denying the appellant's pre-trial motion to exclude from evidence any proof of the victim's plans to move away from the Coulters' mobile home; (6) whether the trial court erred in overruling the appellant's objection to testimony by Sybil Victory concerning a telephone conversation; (7) whether the trial court erred in overruling the appellant's Tenn. R. Evid. 615 objection to testimony by Fawn Jones; (8) whether the trial court erred in overruling the appellant's objection to testimony by the State's firearms identification expert concerning a bullet recovered from the victim's body; (9) whether the trial court erred in permitting each member of the jury to "dry-fire" the murder weapon during the State's case-in-chief; (10) whether the trial court erred in permitting a State's witness to testify by deposition pursuant to Tenn. R. Crim. P. 15; (11) whether the trial court erred in permitting the State to impeach the appellant's psychologist with a "learned treatise" without satisfying the requirements of Tenn. R. Evid. 618; (12) whether the trial court erred in overruling the appellant's objection to rebuttal testimony by the State's psychologist that violated Tenn. R. Crim. P. 12.2(c); (13) whether the trial court erred in failing to charge the jury with certain special instructions requested by the appellant; (14) whether the trial court erred in permitting the State to alter or amend an exhibit immediately prior to the jury's deliberations; (15) whether the evidence adduced at trial is sufficient to support the jury's verdict; and (16) whether the cumulative effect of any errors requires the reversal of the appellant's conviction and the remand of this case for a new trial. Following a review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Originating Judge:J. Steve Daniel |
Rutherford County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 10/17/00 | |
| Wardell Lewis vs. State
E2000-01735-CCA-R3-CD
The petitioner appeals the dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. The trial court dismissed the petition because it was not filed within one year of the date on which the judgments became final. We affirm the trial court.
Originating Judge:E. Shayne Sexton |
Campbell County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 10/17/00 | |
| State vs. John Lee Dockery
E2000-00753-CCA-R3-CD
The Defendant, John Lee Dockery, was convicted after a bench trial of fourth offense driving under the influence (DUI) and driving on a revoked license. In this appeal as of right, the Defendant argues that the trial court erred by admitting into evidence statements the Defendant made to the arresting officer before Miranda warnings were given and that the evidence was insufficient to support the DUI conviction. We conclude that the statements made by the Defendant were properly admitted and that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Originating Judge:Richard R. Baumgartner |
Knox County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 10/17/00 | |
| Clyde Holt vs. City of Memphis
W2000-00913-COA-R3-CV
This is a wrongful death case. The plaintiff called 911 after his mother experienced difficulty breathing and passed out. When the paramedics arrived, the plaintiff's mother had regained consciousness. After examining her, the paramedics told the plaintiff that his mother was not sick enough to be transported to the hospital. The plaintiff asked that his mother be transported to the hospital, but nevertheless signed a form refusing transport to the hospital. A few hours later the plaintiff's mother's condition worsened. When the paramedics returned, they found the mother unconscious, and immediately took her to the hospital. She died seven days later. The plaintiff filed a wrongful death suit, alleging that the paramedics were negligent in not transporting his mother to the hospital on their first run. The trial court found the paramedics negligent and awarded the plaintiff a money judgment. We reverse, holding that the plaintiff was required to establish by expert testimony the standard of care for the paramedics
Authoring Judge: Judge Holly M. Kirby
Originating Judge:Robert L. Childers |
Shelby County | Court of Appeals | 10/17/00 | |
| State vs. Joey Salcido
M1999-00501-CCA-R3-CD
Defendant Joey L. Salcido was indicted by the Giles County Grand Jury for three counts of incest and three counts of rape of a child. Following a jury trial, Defendant was convicted of three counts of aggravated sexual battery as a lesser-included offense of child rape and acquitted of the charges of incest. On March 15, 1999, the trial court sentenced Defendant as a violent 100% offender to a term of twelve years for each of his three convictions and ordered that all sentences be served consecutively. On April 15, 1999, thirty-one days after Defendant's judgment was entered, Defendant filed an untimely motion for new trial. The motion was nevertheless heard on April 19, 1999 and denied on April 20, 1999. On April 23, 1999, Defendant filed a notice of appeal which was also untimely due to the late filing of Defendant's motion for new trial. On May 25, 2000, Defendant filed a motion to waive the timely filing of his notice to appeal and on June 7, 2000, this Court granted Defendant's motion. In this appeal Defendant raises the following issues: (1) whether the Defendant's conviction of aggravated sexual battery, an offense which was neither charged in the indictment nor a lesser-included offense of the offenses charged, was error; (2) whether, assuming aggravated sexual battery is determined to be a lesser-included offense of child rape, the trial court erred in its jury instruction regarding the mental state necessary to convict him; (3) whether the trial court erred when it admitted certain evidence over Defendant's objections; (4) whether the cumulative effect of the trial court's errors renders the trial fundamentally unfair so as to offend Defendant's due process guarantees; and (5) whether the trial court erred when it imposed consecutive sentences. Defendant asserts that his first issue concerns subject matter jurisdiction and, therefore, must be heard by this Court pursuant to Tenn. R. App. P. 13(b). Defendant also urges this Court to exercise its discretion under Tenn. R. Crim. P. 52(b) or Tenn. R. App. P. 13(b) and consider the remaining four issues. After a thorough review of the record and applicable law, we find no errors requiring reversal and affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Originating Judge:Jim T. Hamilton |
Giles County | Court of Criminal Appeals | 10/17/00 |