State of Tennessee v. Nathanael Little - Concurring and Dissenting

Case Number
W2011-02199-CCA-R3-CD

I concur in the majority opinion’s conclusion that the trial court did not err in refusing to hear the Defendant’s suppression motion. I respectfully dissent, though, because I believe the trial court did not have sufficient evidence to support the conclusions regarding both full confinement and consecutive sentencing. I also believe the principles and purposes of the Sentencing Act were not best served by the sentence imposed.

Authoring Judge
Presiding Judge Joseph M. Tipton
Originating Judge
Judge Donald H. Allen
Case Name
State of Tennessee v. Nathanael Little - Concurring and Dissenting
Date Filed
Dissent or Concur
No
Download PDF Version