COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OPINIONS

State vs. Nassel Brown
W1999-01558-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge John Everett Williams
Trial Court Judge: James C. Beasley, Jr.
The petitioner, convicted of one count of rape of a child and sentenced to fifteen years, appeals from the trial court's order dismissing his petition for post-conviction relief. He argues that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing, inter alia, to investigate his case and for failing to interview and subpoena certain witnesses. We conclude that the petitioner has not demonstrated that the trial court erred. Therefore, we affirm the order dismissing his petition.

Shelby Court of Criminal Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Carlos Eddings
W2003-02255-CCA-R3-CD
Trial Court Judge: W. Otis Higgs, Jr.

Shelby Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Michael Spadafina
W1999-00268-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Julian P. Guinn
The Benton County Circuit Court dismissed Michael Joseph Spadafina's petition for post-conviction relief in which Spadafina raised a number of issues of trial error and ineffective assistance of trial counsel in his conviction of first degree murder. On appeal, the petitioner limited his issues to the ineffective assistance of counsel in not seeking an individual, sequestered voir dire of the jury and in not challenging the use of damaging character evidence. Because we conclude that the petitioner failed to carry his post-conviction burden to prove his claims by clear and convincing evidence, we affirm the dismissal of the post-conviction petition.

Benton Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. James Carter
W1999-00799-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Bernie Weinman
A Shelby County jury convicted the Defendant of first degree murder, and the trial court sentenced him to life imprisonment. The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the conviction, and the Tennessee Supreme Court denied permission to appeal. The Defendant filed a petition for post-conviction relief, which the trial court denied after an evidentiary hearing. The Defendant appeals the denial of post-conviction relief and raises the following two issues: (1) whether the jury instruction on circumstantial evidence was proper; and (2) whether he received effective assistance of counsel at his trial. Finding no error, we affirm.

Shelby Court of Criminal Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Rockie Smith
W1999-00814-CCA-R3-CD
Trial Court Judge: John P. Colton, Jr.

Shelby Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Brian Sullivan
W1999-00941-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry Smith
Trial Court Judge: Chris B. Craft
The appellant, Brian Sullivan, entered a plea of nolo contendere in the Shelby County Criminal Court to one count of attempted aggravated sexual battery, a Class C felony. The trial court sentenced the appellant to a term of three (3) years, suspended. On appeal, the appellant argues that the trial court erred in denying his petition for judicial diversion. After a review of the record before this Court, we conclude that because the appellant was convicted of a sexual offense, he is statutorily ineligible for judicial diversion. Therefore, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Shelby Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Lon Pierce
W1999-01433-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge J. Curwood Witt, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: C. Creed Mcginley
The defendant, Lon Adelbert Pierce, appeals from his conviction of the first degree premeditated murder of Larry Gene Peppers, Sr. He raises numerous issues on appeal. Significant among his appellate issues are his challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence based upon his claim of diminished capacity, his claim that a psychologist is incompetent to give rebuttal testimony on the issue of diminished capacity, and his claim that double jeopardy barred his retrial on first degree murder after the jury at his first trial determined that he was not guilty of the offense, as evidenced by juror affidavits. Because we find no error requiring reversal, we affirm the defendant's conviction.

Benton Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Jarvis Loverson
W1999-01750-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Jerry Smith
Trial Court Judge: Joseph B. Dailey
A Shelby County jury convicted the appellant, Jarvis Loverson, of one (1) count of theft of property over $1,000, a Class D felony, and one (1) count of attempted theft of property over $10,000, a Class D felony. The trial court sentenced the appellant as a Range II offender to consecutive terms of twelve (12) years for each offense. On appeal, the appellant contends that the evidence is insufficient to sustain his convictions for theft of property and attempted theft of property. After thoroughly reviewing the record before this Court, we conclude that the state failed to present any evidence regarding the value of the subject property. As a result, the appellant's conviction for theft of property over $1,000 is modified to theft of property valued at $500 or less, and his conviction for attempted theft of property over $10,000 is modified to attempted theft of property with a value of $500 or less.

Shelby Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Jerry Michael Green
E1999-01815-CCA-R9-RL
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Carroll L. Ross
The appellant, Jerry Michael Green, proceeded to trial in the Monroe County Criminal Court for possession of more than .5 grams of cocaine with intent to deliver. Due to the State's improper cross-examination of defense witnesses, the trial court granted the appellant a mistrial. The appellant made a motion in limine to preclude the State, on double jeopardy grounds, from retrying the appellant on possession of cocaine with intent to deliver. The trial court denied the appellant's motion, but granted the appellant permission to appeal its decision. This court granted an interlocutory appeal. In this interlocutory appeal, the appellant claims that double jeopardy bars a retrial because the prosecutor goaded the appellant into requesting a mistrial. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Monroe Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Clint T. Melton
E1999-02090-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Ray L. Jenkins

Knox Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Amelia Kay Stem
M2000-00600-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Stella L. Hargrove
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.

Lawrence Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Gregory Lynn Redden
M2000-00761-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Donald P. Harris
The appellant, Gregory Lynn Redden, pled guilty in the Williamson County Circuit Court to one count of burglary, a class D felony. The trial court sentenced the appellant as a Range III persistent offender to eleven years incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction. The trial court further ordered the appellant to serve this sentence consecutively to the appellant's unserved sentences imposed in Greene County, Missouri, in the United States District Court in the Northern District of Ohio, and in Robertson County, Tennessee. The appellant raises the following issue for our review: whether the trial court erred in ordering the appellant to serve his sentence in this case consecutively to his other sentences. Upon review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Williamson Court of Criminal Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Toscar C. Carpenter, Sr.
M2000-00990-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Donald P. Harris

Williamson Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Richard M. Far, Jr.
M1999-01998-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: James K. Clayton, Jr.
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.

Rutherford Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Andre L. Mayfield
M1999-02415-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Seth W. Norman
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.

Davidson Court of Criminal Appeals

Joseph Whitwell vs. State
M1999-02493-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Cheryl A. Blackburn
Petitioner, Joseph Whitwell, filed a Petition for Post-Conviction Relief in the Davidson County Criminal Court, which the post-conviction court subsequently denied. Petitioner challenges the denial of his petition, raising the following issue: whether the trial court erred in dismissing his Petition for Post-Conviction Relief, based upon a ruling that Petitioner's allegations of ineffective assistance of counsel were without merit. After a thorough review of the record, we find that the Petitioner did not receive the ineffective assistance of counsel. We therefore affirm the trial court's denial of the Petitioner's Petition for Post-Conviction Relief.

Davidson Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Charles Swaffer
M2000-00058-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: J. O. Bond
Defendant Charles E. Swaffer was convicted by a Macon County jury of one count of Class C theft of property over $10,000 and one count of Class D vandalism over $1,000. The trial court subsequently imposed concurrent sentences of five years and three years, with Defendant to serve one year of incarceration followed by supervised probation. Defendant challenges his convictions, raising the following issues: (1) whether the trial court erred when it failed to grant a motion for a mistrial; (2) whether the evidence was sufficient to support his convictions; and (3) whether the trial court erred in applying improper enhancing factors and rejecting his mitigating factors. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Macon Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Ernest E. Pride
M2000-00319-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Seth W. Norman
The appellant, Ernest E. Pride, was convicted by a jury in the Davidson County Criminal Court of one count of tampering with evidence, a class C felony; one count of possession of less than .5 grams of cocaine with the intent to sell, a class C felony; one count of simple possession of marijuana, a class A misdemeanor; one count of criminal trespass, a class C misdemeanor; one count of resisting arrest, a class B misdemeanor; and one count of unlawful possession of drug paraphernalia, a class A misdemeanor. The trial court sentenced the appellant, as a Range II offender, to the following terms of incarceration in the Tennessee Department of Correction: eight years for the tampering with evidence conviction, eight years for the possession of cocaine with intent to sell conviction, eleven months and twenty-nine days for the possession of marijuana conviction, thirty days for the criminal trespass conviction, and six months for the resisting arrest conviction. Additionally, the trial court ordered the appellant to serve all of the sentences concurrently. The trial court entered a verdict of not guilty for the possession of drug paraphernalia. The appellant raises the following issues for our review: (1) whether the evidence contained in the record is sufficient to support a finding by a rational trier of fact that the appellant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of possession of less than .5 grams of cocaine with intent to sell and tampering with the evidence as charged in the indictment; and (2) whether the trial court imposed excessive sentences for the convictions of tampering with evidence and possession of less than .5 grams of cocaine with intent to sell. Based upon our review of the record and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Davidson Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Robert Mallard
M2000-00351-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: J. Steve Daniel
In a two count indictment, Defendant was charged in Rutherford County Circuit Court with attempting to tamper with or fabricate evidence, and with resisting arrest. Following a jury trial, he was convicted of both offenses. In this appeal, the Defendant argues that the trial court erred by denying his motion to suppress evidence and he further asserts that the evidence is insufficient to sustain the conviction for attempting to tamper with or fabricate evidence. After a review of the record and the applicable law, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Rutherford Court of Criminal Appeals

James Dubose vs. State
M2000-00478-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Norma McGee Ogle
Trial Court Judge: Donald P. Harris
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.

Williamson Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. John Charles Johnson
M2000-00529-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: J. Randall Wyatt, Jr.
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.

Davidson Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Nicholas Williams
M1999-00780-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Trial Court Judge: Jim T. Hamilton
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.

Giles Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Joseph Miles
M1998-00682-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge Thomas T. Woodall
Trial Court Judge: Robert W. Wedemeyer
Defendant Joseph Miles was convicted by a Robertson County jury of second degree murder. After a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced Defendant as a Range II violent offender to forty years. On appeal, Defendant raises the following issues: (1) whether the evidence is sufficient to support his conviction for second degree murder, (2) whether the sentence imposed by the trial court is excessive, and (3) whether a finding of plain error pursuant to Tenn. R. Crim. P. 52(b) justifies a dismissal of charges on the ground that the State participated in a conspiracy to kill Defendant. After a review of the record, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Robertson Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Joseph Faulkner
W1999-00223-CCA-R3-PC
Authoring Judge: Judge David G. Hayes
Trial Court Judge: Carolyn Wade Blackett
The appellant presents this appeal following dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. Faulkner entered guilty pleas to one count of aggravated rape and three counts of aggravated robbery in the Shelby County Criminal Court. Pursuant to his negotiated plea agreement, the appellant was sentenced to an effective sentence of twenty-five years. The plea agreement further provided that his state sentences were to be served concurrently with outstanding federal sentences and that all sentences would be served in federal custody. After pleading guilty to the state charges, the federal government refused to accept Faulkner into federal custody. Faulkner now asserts that his trial counsel was ineffective for providing erroneous advice and, as a result, his guilty pleas were not knowingly and voluntarily entered. Based upon the unfulfilled bargain of his negotiated plea agreement, he asks that his guilty pleas be set aside and that his case be remanded for trial or other appropriate relief. The State concedes that Faulkner is entitled to post-conviction relief. Finding Faulkner's request for post-conviction relief meritorious, we reverse the judgment of the post-conviction court and remand to the Shelby County Criminal Court for further proceedings.

Shelby Court of Criminal Appeals

State vs. Nicholas Robert Brown
E1999-00110-CCA-R3-CD
Authoring Judge: Judge David H. Welles
Trial Court Judge: Richard R. Vance
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.

Sevier Court of Criminal Appeals