APPELLATE COURT OPINIONS

The Petitioner, Antonio Vantress Brown,¹ appeals the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. He originally pled guilty to various offenses and received an effective sentence of thirty years. On appeal, the Petitioner contends: (1) he received ineffective assistance of counsel in entering his guilty pleas; and (2) his guilty pleas were not knowingly and voluntarily entered. Upon review of the record and the applicable law, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

As a result of a jury trial in Shelby County, the Defendant, Andrea Spencer, stands convicted of one count of aggravated rape, two counts of aggravated burglary, two counts of aggravated kidnapping, and one count of sexual battery. The trial court ordered the Defendant to serve an effective sentence of eighty-four years as a Range II multiple offender. On appeal, the Defendant contends (1) the trial court erred in refusing to sever the offenses; (2) dual aggravated kidnapping convictions violate double jeopardy principles; and (3) his sentence is excessive. Upon review of the record and the applicable law, we vacate one of the Defendant’s two aggravated kidnapping convictions due to a double jeopardy violation. In addition, because certain enhancement factors were wrongfully applied, we reduce the Defendant’s sentence for sexual battery by one year and one of his sentences for aggravated burglary by three years, thereby reducing the Defendant’s effective sentence to eighty years. We otherwise affirm the judgments of the trial court.

The Defendant, Edrian Rice,1 pled guilty to possession of cocaine with intent to sell, possession of marijuana with the intent to sell, the unlawful carrying of a weapon with the intent to go armed, possession of drug paraphernalia, and driving under the influence, first offense. The trial court ordered the Defendant to serve an effective sentence of ten years in confinement as a Range I standard offender. On appeal, the Defendant contends (1) his sentence is excessive; and (2) the trial court erred in denying alternative sentencing. We affirm the judgments of the trial court.

The appellant, Curtis E. Wells, pled guilty in the Williamson County Circuit Court to robbery, a Class C felony. The plea agreement provided that the appellant would receive a sentence of six years, with the manner of service to be determined by the trial court. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court ordered the appellant to serve one year at one hundred percent (100%) in the Williamson County Jail, with the remainder of the sentence to be suspended and served on intensive probation. On appeal, the appellant asserts that the trial court erred by not granting total probation. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The defendant, Elmore Lewis Baker, Jr., pled guilty in the Blount County Circuit Court to eight offenses: counts one through four, delivery of a Schedule VI controlled substance, a Class E felony; count five, possession of drug paraphernalia, a Class A misdemeanor; count six, possession of a Schedule VI controlled substance with intent to sell or deliver, a Class E felony; and counts seven and eight, delivery of drug paraphernalia, a Class E felony. The defendant was sentenced as a Range I, standard offender to one year on counts one through three, two years on count four, eleven months and twenty-nine days on count five, two years on count six, one year on count seven, and two years on count eight. The plea agreement stipulated the sentences were to run concurrently, and the trial court determined that the sentences should be served as ninety days in jail and the remainder on probation. The defendant appeals, claiming that his sentences are excessive and that he should have received full probation. We affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Prior to this appeal, the petitioner, Joseph Shepherd, was convicted of involuntary manslaughter in one proceeding, and, in a separate proceeding, he was convicted of felony murder and aggravated assault. He is currently serving a life sentence. The petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief in each case, raising several issues, including ineffective assistance of counsel. The post-conviction court denied relief in both cases and the petitioner appealed. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

The defendant, Barbara Sue Moore, pled guilty in the Davidson County Criminal Court to theft of property valued $60,000 or more, a Class B felony, and theft of property valued $1,000 or more but less than $10,000, a Class D felony. Pursuant to the plea agreement, the defendant received concurrent sentences of eight and two years, respectively, with the manner of service to be determined by the trial court. After a sentencing hearing, the trial court denied the defendant's request for alternative sentences and ordered that she serve her sentences in the Department of Correction. The defendant appeals, claiming that the trial court erred by ordering that she serve her sentences in confinement. We affirm the judgments of the trial court.

A Dickson County jury convicted the defendant, Robert Kern Holloway, of second degree murder, a Class A felony, and he was sentenced to forty years to be served at 100% as a violent offender. On appeal, he argues: the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction; the trial court improperly instructed the jury regarding the mens rea element of second degree murder; and the trial court abused its discretion in ruling on his pro se motion for a new trial which alleged ineffective assistance of counsel. Upon review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court as to the defendant's conviction but vacate its ruling as to the pro se ineffective assistance of counsel claim.

The Davidson County Grand Jury indicted the defendant for aggravated gambling promotion. The trial judge denied the defendant's preliminary motion to suppress certain evidence, and a Davidson County jury found the defendant guilty as charged. The court sentenced him to two years of probation, a $1,000 fine, and five hours of unpaid community service per month for twenty-four months. He now appeals claiming: (1) that the trial court erred in failing to suppress physical evidence gathered during and incriminating statements made as a result of a warrantless search; and (2) that the evidence was insufficient to support a conviction for aggravated gambling promotion. Finding no reversible error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The petitioner appeals the summary dismissal of his post-conviction relief petition based upon the expiration of the statute of limitations. He argues: (1) due process required the post-conviction court to hear his petition because of his attorney’s inaction even though it was filed outside the statute of limitations; and, regardless, (2) his convictions should be set aside because they are based on void indictments. We affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.