APPELLATE COURT OPINIONS

A Knox County jury convicted the Petitioner of first degree murder, and the trial court imposed a life sentence in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On direct appeal, this Court affirmed the conviction, and the Tennessee Supreme Court denied the Defendant's application for permission to appeal. The Petitioner then sought post-conviction relief, alleging that he was denied effective assistance of counsel. Following a hearing, the post-conviction court dismissed the petition, and this appeal ensued. We affirm the trial court's dismissal of the petition.

The defendant, Douglas Lee Overall, was convicted by a Tipton County Circuit Court jury of aggravated kidnapping, a Class B felony; aggravated assault, a Class C felony; and possession of drug paraphernalia, a Class A misdemeanor. The trial court sentenced him to concurrent sentences of twelve years for the aggravated kidnapping conviction, twelve years for the aggravated assault conviction, and eleven months, twenty-nine days for the possession of drug paraphernalia conviction. The defendant appeals, claiming that the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions. We affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Petitioner, Alden Joe Daniel, Jr., appeals the trial court’s denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. In his initial brief filed with the assistance of retained counsel, Petitioner argues that the trial court erred in finding that Petitioner’s plea of guilty was voluntary and knowing and in finding that Petitioner’s trial counsel rendered effective assistance of counsel during the interval between Petitioner’s first and second trial and during plea negotiations. After the filing of his initial brief, this Court granted Petitioner’s counsel leave to withdraw as counsel and denied Petitioner’s motion for the appointment of substitute counsel. Thereafter, Petitioner filed a motion to reconsider post-judgment facts pursuant to Rule 14 of the Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure and a pro se supplemental brief. In his brief, Petitioner alleges that his post-conviction counsel rendered ineffective assistance of counsel and that the trial court based its findings on erroneous facts. Petitioner requests that this Court remand the matter to the trial court for an evidentiary hearing as to factual matters not presented at Petitioner’s post-conviction proceeding. For the reasons discussed herein, we deny Petitioner’s motion to consider post-judgment facts and affirm the trial court’s dismissal of the petition for post-conviction relief.

The State appeals contending the trial court erred in allowing the defendant to receive jail credit from an unrelated charge against the 150-day mandatory minimum sentence he received in his plea to sixth offense D.U.I. Also, the State alleges error in the trial court modifying the defendant's payment plan for paying fines and costs to less than the defendant agreed to pay when the trial court accepted the defendant's plea agreement. We conclude it was error to allow this defendant to receive any jail credit toward his mandatory minimum of 150 days for his sixth D.U.I. offense where the credit accumulated on an unrelated charge. We further conclude the trial court was within its discretion to modify the payment plan, not the overall fine, upon determining the defendant did not have the ability to pay. We reverse in part and affirm in part the judgments of the trial court and remand for entry of a corrected judgment consistent with this opinion.

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.

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.

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.

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.