|

March 22, 2001
Volume 7 -- Number 053

What follows is the case style or name, first paragraph, author's
name, and the names of attorneys for the parties of each opinion
released eletronically today to TBALink.
- This Issue (IN THIS ORDER):
-
| 04 |
New Opinion(s) from the Tennessee Supreme Court |
| 00 |
New Opinion(s) from the Tennessee Supreme Court Workers' Compensation
Panel |
| 00 |
New Document(s) or Proposed Rule(s) from the Tennessee Supreme
Court |
| 06 |
New Opinion(s) from the Tennessee Court of Appeals |
| 07 |
New Opinion(s) from the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals |
| 00 |
New Opinion(s) from the Tennessee Attorney General (PDF format)
|
| 00 |
New Judicial Ethics Opinion(s) |
| 00 |
New Formal Ethics Opinion(s) from the Board of Professional Responsibility
|
-
There are three ways for TBALink members to get the full-text
versions of these opinions from the Web:
Do a key word search in the Search Link area of TBALink. This option will allow you to view and save
a plain-text version of the opinion.
Browse the Opinion List area of TBALink. This option will allow you to download the original
version of the opinion.
Click the URL at end of each Opinion paragraph below. This option
will allow you to download the original document.
Lucian T. Pera
Editor-in-Chief, TBALink

ROBERT ALLEN FAHEY v. FABIEN ELDRIDGE & ELDRIDGE AUTO SALES, INC.
Court:TSC
Attorneys:
Chantal M. Eldridge, Cookville, Tennessee, and Rick Halprin, Chicago,
Illinois, for the appellant, Fabien Eldridge.
Samuel J. Harris, Cookville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Eldridge
Auto Sales, Inc.
William E. Farmer, Lebanon, Tennessee, for the appellee, Robert Allen
Fahey.
Judge:
First Paragraph:
The primary issue presented in this case is whether the Court of
Appeals erred in finding that the defendants waived all issues on
appeal by failing to specifically state these issues in their motions
for a new trial as required by Tennessee Rule of Appellate Procedure
3(e). The defendants were found liable by a jury for the assault and
battery of the plaintiff, and they were ordered to pay compensatory
and punitive damages in the amount of $1.75 million. The defendants
filed motions for a new trial, which were denied by the trial court,
in part, because the alleged errors were not specifically enumerated.
On appeal, the Court of Appeals found that the alleged errors were not
stated with sufficient specificity in the motions so as to preserve
them for appeal, and it dismissed all issues before it. The
defendants then requested permission to appeal to this Court. We hold
that the defendants' motions for a new trial did set forth several
issues for review in compliance with Rule 3(e), and we remand this
case to the Court of Appeals for a determination of these issues on
their merits.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC/faheyra.wpd
STATE OF TENNESSEE v. ROBERT L. MALLARD
Court:TSC
Attorneys:
Gerald L. Melton, District Public Defender; Brion J. Payne, Assistant
Public Defender, for the appellant, Robert L. Mallard.
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Michael E. Moore,
Solicitor General; J. Ross Dyer, Assistant Attorney General,
Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.
Judge: BARKER
First Paragraph:
In this appeal, we address whether Tennessee Code Annotated section
39-17-424 (1997) requires admission into evidence of a defendant's
prior convictions relating to controlled substances, even when
Tennessee Rule of Evidence 404(b) would otherwise render such evidence
inadmissible. During the appellant's trial in the Rutherford County
Circuit Court for possession of drug paraphernalia, the State admitted
evidence of the appellant's prior convictions for
posse0/00@)?0/00J-ocaine and dYePeparaphernalia under section
39-17-424 to show that the object possessed was classifiable as drug
paraphernalia. Upon his conviction, the appellant appealed to the
Court of Criminal Appeals, which affirmed his conviction and held that
the statute required admission of the prior convictions
notwithstanding any otherwise applicable rule of evidence. We granted
the appellant's application for permission to appeal, and we hold that
the legislature did not intend for section 39-17-424 to operate
without regard to the Rules of Evidence. We also hold that the
evidence of the appellant's prior convictions was improperly admitted
under Rule 404(b), and that this error affirmatively appears to have
affected the outcome of the trial on its merits. We therefore reverse
the Court of Criminal Appeals and remand this case to the Rutherford
County Circuit Court for a new trial.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC/mallardrl.wpd
STATE OF TENNESSEE v. SCOTT HOUSTON NIX
Court:TSC
Attorneys:
Mark A. Brown, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the appellants, Scott Houston
Nix and Ralph Dean Purkey.
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Michael E. Moore,
Solicitor General; and Jennifer L. Smith, Assistant Attorney General,
Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.
Judge: DROWOTA
First Paragraph:
We granted permission to appeal to consider an issue of first
impression: what is the standard of mental incompetence that a
petitioner must satisfy before due process requires tolling of the
post- conviction statute of limitations. We agree with the Court of
Criminal Appeals that due process requires tolling of the statute of
limitations only if a petitioner is unable either to manage his or her
own personal affairs or to understand his or her legal rights and
liabilities. We also agree with the intermediate appellate court
that, taken as true, the allegations of these petitions are
insufficient to make a prima facie showing of incompetency.
Accordingly, we affirm the judgments of the Court of Criminal Appeals
which upheld the trial court judgments that dismissed these petitions
as time-barred by the statute of limitations.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC/nixpurkeyopn.wpd
STATE OF TENNESSEE v. GERALD H. SHAFFER
Court:TSC
Attorneys:
Mark E. Stephens, District Public Defender, and Paula R. Voss,
Assistant Public Defender, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the appellant,
Gerald H. Shaffer.
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter, Michael E. Moore,
Solicitor General, Todd R. Kelley, Assistant Attorney General, Randall
E. Nichols, District Attorney General, and Marsha Selecman, Assistant
District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.
Judge: BIRCH
First Paragraph:
The Criminal Court for Knox County found that Gerald H. Shaffer had
violated the terms of his probation and, on this finding, revoked it.
Shaffer appealed and contended that the trial court did not have the
authority to revoke probation and that the trial court abused its
discretion by basing revocation on new grounds alleged in an amendment
to the revocation warrant. The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed and
held that the trial court had the authority to revoke probation and
did not abuse its discretion. Because we conclude that the trial
court had the authority to revoke Shaffer's probation and did not
abuse its discretion in basing the probation revocation on additional
grounds alleged in the amendment, we affirm the judgment of the Court
of Criminal Appeals.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC/shafferg.wpd
SABRINA BURTON, et al. v. CARROLL COUNTY, TENNESSEE, et al.
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
Robert T. Keeton, Jr. and Robert T. Keeton, III, of Huntingdon for
Appellants, Carroll County, Tennessee and Yuma Volunteer Fire
Department
Ricky L. Wood of Parsons and Michael A. Jaynes of Jackson for
Appellees, Sabrina and Michael Burton
Judge: CRAWFORD
First Paragraph:
Plaintiffs, husband and wife, sued county and county's volunteer fire
department pursuant to Tennessee Governmental Tort Liability Act
seeking damages for wife's personal injuries and husband's loss of
consortium sustained while they were patronizing a "haunted house"
operated by the volunteer fire department to raise funds. Plaintiffs
allege that the defendants were negligent in (1) creating a dangerous
and defective condition and failing to correct that condition; (2)
failing to warn the public of the dangers and defective condition; and
(3) failing to maintain the premises in a reasonably safe condition.
The trial court, sitting without a jury, entered judgment for the
plaintiffs. Defendants have appealed. The trial court's judgment is
affirmed.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/burtonsab.wpd
CARROLL COUNTY SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY v. ODILLION COLLINS
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
Odillion Collins, pro se
Robert T. Keeton, Jr., for Appellee
Judge: HIGHERS
First Paragraph:
This case involves a dispute over issues surrounding Carroll County's
imposition of a garbage collection fee on its residents. The trial
court granted summary judgment to Plaintiff, and the Defendant
appeals.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/carrollcountysolid.wpd
AUDREY MOSS v. SHEILA K. SANKEY, et al.
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
James V. Ball, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellant, Audrey Moss.
Alex C. Elder, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellees, Mark A. Tyler
and Dick Diggons Body Works, Inc.
Judge: FARMER
First Paragraph:
This appeal arises from a negligence action arising out of a vehicular
accident. Driver was turning onto a main road from a side street
without the right-of-way. As she emerged from the side street, she
was struck by Worker, an employee of Company, whose wrecker had been
driving on the road. The collision diverted the wrecker into the
oncoming lanes of traffic, where it struck a car driven by Plaintiff.
Plaintiff brought suit against Driver, Worker and Company for her
injuries. A jury found Driver 100% liable for the injuries.
Plaintiff appealed stating that the verdict was against the
preponderance of the evidence, that the judge had incorrectly denied a
motion for a new trial, and that a sleeping juror had violated
Plaintiff's right to a trial by jury. We affirm.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/mossaudrey.wpd
JUDY DIANE PENNINGTON v. FRANK RAY PENNINGTON
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
Carthel L. Smith, Jr., for Appellant
James F. Butler, Lisa A. Houston, for Appellee
Judge: HIGHERS
First Paragraph:
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.
The Appellant appeals the trial court's calculation of child support
as well as the award of the office building to the Appellee in lieu of
child support and alimony. For the reasons stated herein, we reverse
and remand in part, and we remand in part for further findings of
fact.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/penningtonjudy.wpd
IN THE MATTER OF: CHRISTOPHER CODY RAINEY
JAMES CHRISTOPHER RAINEY v. LESLIE HEAD
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
Cynthia A. Wilson, for Appellant
John D. Horne, for Appellee
Judge: HIGHERS
First Paragraph:
This is a case involving termination of parental rights. The
Appellant executed a consent order terminating his parental rights to
his child. Asserting that he executed the order under influence and
duress by the Appellee and her family, the Appellant then filed a
Petition to Vacate Order Terminating Parental Rights. The Juvenile
Court of Shelby County dismissed the Appellant's Petition.
The Appellant appeals from the dismissal of the Petition to Vacate
Order Terminating Parental Rights. For the reasons stated herein, we
affirm the trial court's decision.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/raineychristopher.wpd
IN THE MATTER OF OLIVER RAY VALENTINE, JR., D.O.B.: 3/23/94, A CHILD
UNDER THE AGE OF 18 YEARS
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
Debra N. Brittenum, Webb A. Brewer, and Nancy P. Kessler, Memphis, for
the appellants, Chanya Wallace Valentine and Oliver Ray Valentine, Sr.
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter, and Douglas Earl
Dimond, Assistant Attorney General, Nashville, for the appellee,
Tennessee Department of Children's Services
Judge: KIRBY LILLARD
First Paragraph:
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.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/valentineor.wpd
STATE OF TENNESSEE v. WILLIAM P. BROOKS
Court:TCCA
Attorneys:
Julie A. Rice, Contract Appellate Defender, Knoxville, Tennessee, and
Mack Garner, District Public Defender, Maryville, Tennessee, for the
appellant, William P. Brooks.
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Clinton J. Morgan,
Assistant Attorney General; and John Bobo, Assistant District
Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.
Judge: WADE
First Paragraph:
The defendant, William P. Brooks, was convicted of driving on a
revoked license, third offense, a Class A misdemeanor. The trial
court imposed a sentence of 11 months and 29 days, requiring 90 days
to be served in jail and the balance to be served on supervised
probation. In this appeal of right, the defendant argues that the
trial court erred by refusing to suppress evidence and by imposing an
excessive sentence. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/brookswp.wpd
MICHAEL WAYNE DEAN v. STATE OF TENNESSEE
Court:TCCA
Attorneys:
Michael Wayne Dean, Pikeville, Tennessee, Pro Se.
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Clinton J. Morgan,
Counsel for the State; and James Michael Taylor, District Attorney
General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.
Judge: TIPTON
First Paragraph:
The petitioner challenges the trial court's dismissal of his petition
for habeas corpus relief. He contends that the trial court lacked
jurisdiction to enter a judgment for second degree murder because that
offense is not a lesser included offense of felony murder with which
he was indicted. We affirm the trial court's dismissal of the habeas
corpus petition.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/deanmw.wpd
STATE OF TENNESSEE v. TRACY L. FRY.
Court:TCCA
Attorneys:
Michael D. Kellum, Johnson City, Tennessee, for the appellant, Tracy
L. Fry.
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General & Reporter; Clinton J. Morgan,
Assistant Attorney General, Nashville, Tennessee; Joe Crumley,
District Attorney General and Victor Vaughn, Assistant District
Attorney, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.
Judge: SMITH
First Paragraph:
Tracy Fry, the Defendant and Appellant, pled guilty to driving under
the influence, second offense. With the State's and trial court's
agreement, however, she specifically reserved the right to appeal a
dispositive question of law pursuant to Tenn. R. Crim. P. 37(b)(2)(1).
The issue reserved for review is whether Officer Kyte "had reasonable
suspicion based on specific and articulable facts, to approach and
subsequently seize the defendant leading to the arrest of the
defendant." We conclude that the initial encounter between Officer
Kyte and the Defendant was not a seizure, that the encounter provided
reasonable suspicion sufficient to justify an investigatory detention
of the Defendant, and that sufficient probable cause to arrest the
Defendant developed during the course of the brief investigatory
detention. Thus, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/frytracy.wpd
STATE OF TENNESSEE v. SONYA MICHELLE GOSNELL and BRONZO GOSNELL, JR.
Court:TCCA
Attorneys:
Greg W. Eichelman, District Public Defender; Michael A. Walcher,
Assistant District Public Defender, Greeneville, Tennessee, for the
appellant, Sonya Michelle Gosnell.
William Louis Ricker, Greeneville, Tennessee, for the appellant,
Bronzo Gosnell, Jr.
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Russell S. Baldwin,
Assistant Attorney General; C. Berkeley Bell, District Attorney
General; and Cecil C. Mills, Assistant District Attorney General, for
the appellee, State of Tennessee.
Judge: RILEY
First Paragraph:
A jury convicted both defendants of second degree murder. Bronzo
Gosnell and Sonya Gosnell were sentenced to 25 years and 20 years,
respectively. In this appeal as a matter of right, both defendants
challenge the introduction of recorded conversations made while
detained in a police cruiser. Sonya Gosnell further challenges the
introduction of certain pretrial statements, the administration of a
polygraph examination, the denial of her motion for severance, and the
denial of expert assistance. Bronzo Gosnell further challenges the
trial court's limitation of his cross-examination of a witness and his
maximum sentence of 25 years. Our review of the issues presented by
the defendants reflects no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm
the judgments of the trial court.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/gosnellsm.wpd
STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JAMES E. HARMAN, JR.
Court:TCCA
Attorneys:
Terry L. Jordan, Blountville, Tennessee, for the appellant, James E.
Harman, Jr.
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General & Reporter; Peter M. Coughlin,
Assistant District Attorney; Mike Flynn, District Attorney General and
Jim Goodwin, District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of
Tennessee.
Judge: SMITH
First Paragraph:
In October of 1999, the defendant pled guilty to one count of theft
over one-thousand dollars ($1,000.00) and one count of possession of
less than .5 ounces of marijuana. His plea form indicated that he
agreed to receive concurrent sentences of five and one-half years as a
Range II, multiple offender for the former offense and eleven months
and twenty-nine days for the latter. Subsequently, the trial court
conducted a hearing to determine the manner in which these sentences
were to be served. At the conclusion of such hearing, the trial court
denied the defendant any form of alternative sentencing, and it is
this denial that the defendant contests through his appeal. However,
after having reviewed the record and applicable authorities, we find
this contention to be without merit and, therefore, affirm the trial
court's sentence.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/harmanjames.wpd
STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JAMES PERRY HYDE
Court:TCCA
Attorneys:
William H. Bell, Greeneville, Tennessee, for the appellant, James
Perry Hyde.
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General & Reporter; R. Stephen Jobe,
Assistant Attorney General; and Eric Christiansen, Assistant District
Attorney, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.
Judge: WADE
First Paragraph:
The petitioner, James Perry Hyde, appeals the trial court's denial of
post-conviction relief. The issue presented for review is whether
the petitioner was denied the effective assistance of counsel at
trial. The judgment is affirmed.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/hydejp.wpd
STATE OF TENNESSEE v. GARY RUSSELL
Court:TCCA
Attorneys:
Michael W. Ritter, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, for the appellant, Gary
Russell.
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter, Glen C. Watson,
Assistant Attorney General, and Jan Hicks, Assistant District Attorney
General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.
Judge: McGEE OGLE
First Paragraph:
The petitioner, James Perry Hyde, appeals the trial court's denial of
post-conviction relief. The issue presented for review is whether
the petitioner was denied the effective assistance of counsel at
trial. The judgment is affirmed.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/russellg.wpd

PLEASE FORWARD THIS E-MAIL!
Feel free to forward this Opinion Flash on to anyone you know
of with an e-mail address.
GET A FULL-TEXT COPY OF AN OPINION!
See the intrsuctions at the beginning of this edition of Opinion
Flash.
JOIN TBALink!
While Opinion Flash is a free service of the Tennessee Bar Association,
you must be a subscriber to TBALink, the premier Web site for
Tennessee attorneys, in order to access the full-text of the opinions
or enjoy many other features of TBALink. TBA members may join
TBALink for just $50 per year. To join, go to: http://www.tba.org/join.html/
SUBSCRIBE TO OPINION FLASH!
Would you like to receive the TBALink Opinion Flash free each
day by e-mail? Anyone, whether a TBA member or not, is welcome
to subscribe ... it's free!
For the Plain Text Version:
1) Send an e-mail message to: Opinion-Flash@tba.org
2) In the SUBJECT of the message type: SUBSCRIBE
3) Leave the body of the message blank
For the HTML Text Version:
1) Send an e-mail message to: Opinion-Flash@tba.org
2) In the SUBJECT of the message type: SUBSCRIBE HTML
3) Leave the body of the message blank
UNSUBSCRIBE TO OPINION FLASH? ... SURELY NOT!
To STOP receiving TBALink Opinion-Flash:
1) Send an e-mail message to: Opinion-Flash@tba.org
2) In the SUBJECT of the message type: UNSUBSCRIBE
3) Leave the body of the message blank

     
© Copyright 2001 Tennessee Bar Association
|