Opinion FlashJanuary 11, 2002
Volume 8 Number 008
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.
There are three ways for TBALink members to get the full-text versions of these opinions from the Web:
Howard H. Vogel
STATE OF TENNESSEE v. MICHAEL JACKSON Court:TSC Attorneys: Tony N. Brayton, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellant, Michael Jackson. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General & Reporter; Michael E. Moore, Solicitor General; and J. Ross Dyer, Assistant Attorney General, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: BARKER First Paragraph: The defendant in this case was convicted of aggravated robbery and was sentenced to twelve years imprisonment, the maximum sentence allowed for a Range I standard offender convicted of a Class B felony. The trial court applied three enhancement factors, and the Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed two of them: (1) the defendant was a leader in the commission of an offense involving two or more criminal actors, Tenn. Code Ann. S 40-35-114(2); and (2) the defendant has a previous history of unwillingness to comply with the conditions of a sentence involving release in the community, Tenn. Code Ann. S 40-35-114(8). In addition, the intermediate court determined that the defendant was adjudicated to have committed a delinquent act or acts as a juvenile that would constitute a felony if committed by an adult, Tenn. Code Ann. S 40-35-114(20). The defendant now argues that a court may only consider a juvenile record under factor (20), and consequently, the trial court improperly applied factor (8) to his juvenile probation violations. The sole issue in this case, then, is whether factor (20) is the exclusive means for using a juvenile court record to enhance sentences in subsequent adult criminal proceedings. We hold that factor (20) applies only to adjudicated delinquent acts; because juvenile probation violations do not fall within the purview of factor (20), factor (8) was therefore properly applied to enhance the defendant's sentence. Consequently, we find that a sentence of twelve years imprisonment is appropriate and supported by the preponderance of the evidence, and we affirm the judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC/jacksonmrev.wpd
STATE OF TENNESSEE v. MARCUS MORROW Court:TSC Attorneys: Christopher L. Dunn, Columbia, Tennessee, for the Appellant, Marcus L. Morrow. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Michael M. Moore, Solicitor General; and David H. Findley, Assistant Attorney General, for the Appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: HOLDER First Paragraph: We granted this appeal to determine whether Tenn. Code Ann. S 41-2-128 authorizes a court other than a general sessions court to grant work release to a defendant convicted of driving under the influence of an intoxicant (DUI), second offense. We hold that Tenn. Code Ann. S 41-2-128 does not permit a circuit court to grant work release to DUI second offenders during the forty-five-day minimum mandatory sentence. The holding of the Court of Criminal Appeals is affirmed. The case is remanded to the trial court for proceedings consistent with this opinion. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC/morrowma.wpd
CORRECTED OPINION DONALD PICKLESIMER v. MCKEE FOODS CORPORATION Court:TSC - Workers Comp Panel Attorneys: Robert D. Bradshaw, of Chattanooga, Tennessee, for appellant, Donald Picklesimer. J. Bartlett Quinn and Charles D. Lawson, of Chattanooga, Tennessee, for appellee, McKee Foods Corporation. Judge: THAYER First Paragraph: This workers' compensation appeal has been referred to the Special Workers' Compensation Appeals Panel of the Supreme Court in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann.S 50-6-225(e)(3) for hearing and reporting to the Supreme Court of findings of fact and conclusions of law. The trial court awarded the employee 72 percent permanent partial disability to the body as a whole. The employee appealed insisting his disability was 100 percent. Judgment of the trial court is affirmed. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC_WCP/picklesimer.wpd
JON D. HALL v. BILL MCLESKY, et al. Court:TCA Jon Hall has filed a respectful and well-written Petition to Rehear. After examining his Petition and the arguments contained therein, we conclude that Mr. Hall is not entitled to the relief he seeks, and we accordingly decline to grant him another hearing. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/halljd.wpd
JANET FAYE JACOBS, et al. v. ALVIN R. SINGH, M.D. Court:TCA Attorneys: C. Hayes Cooney, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Alvin R. Singh, M.D. Jerry Scott and John L. Kea, II, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, for the appellees, Janet Faye Jacobs and Jimmy E. Jacobs. Judge: FARMER First Paragraph: Defendant physician appeals judgment for Plaintiffs in a jury trial of a medical malpractice action. Upon review of the record, we do not find that Plaintiffs' case was time barred pursuant to the statute of limitations. We find material evidence in the record to support the verdict and a jury finding that medical expenses incurred by the Plaintiff were necessary and reasonable. We therefore affirm. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/jacobsjanetfaye.wpd
THOMAS CLINTON WYNNS, III. v. RAE ANN CUMMINGS Court:TCA Attorneys: Harvey Gipson, Memphis, For Appellant, Thomas Clinton Wynns, III Bruce A. Ralston, Memphis, For Appellee, Rae Ann Cummings Judge: CRAWFORD First Paragraph: This case involves a dispute between Thomas Clinton Wynns, III ("Thomas") and Rae Ann Cummings ("Rae Ann"), the son and granddaughter of Mrs. Leola Wynns ("Leola"), concerning Leola's mental capacity and ability to manage her own affairs. Plaintiff, Thomas, holder of a power of attorney from his mother, filed a complaint against the defendant, Rae Ann, seeking to have Rae Ann turn over to him all of Leola's assets in possession of Rae Ann. Rae Ann filed an answer to the complaint and a petition for appointment of a conservator for Leola and for an injunction against Thomas from removing any more of her assets. After a nonjury trial, the trial court found that the court had jurisdiction to appoint a conservator for Leola; that the facts warranted the appointment of a conservator; that the power of attorney held by Thomas and a will executed by Leola in 1998 were void, and that the quit claim deed executed on April 22, 1999, in favor of Thomas, was also void. Thomas appeals. We affirm in part, vacate in part, and remand. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/wynnstho.wpd
STATE OF TENNESSEE v. CHAD DAVIS Court:TCCA Attorneys: Leslie I. Ballin, Memphis, Tennessee, for the Appellant, Chad Davis. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Michael Moore, Solicitor General; Renee W. Turner, Assistant Attorney General; William L. Gibbons, District Attorney General; and William Bond, Assistant District Attorney General, for the Appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: HAYES First Paragraph: The Appellant, Chad Davis, pled guilty in the Shelby County Criminal Court to DUI, second offense, and driving on a revoked license. At the sentencing hearing, Davis requested that he be permitted to serve on work release the imposed forty-five day mandatory jail sentence for DUI, second offense, and the consecutive two-day jail sentence for driving on a revoked license. The trial court found Davis was ineligible for work release because he was self-employed. Davis now appeals this ruling. In response, the State asserts that the trial court was without authority under the provisions of the work release statute, Tennessee Code Annotated S 41-2-128, to grant work release to Davis or any other person convicted of DUI, second offense, prior to expiration of the minimum period of confinement. After review, we find both the trial court's ruling and the State's argument on appeal misplaced. Accordingly, the trial court's ruling that Davis was ineligible for work release is reversed and this case is remanded to the trial court for determination of Davis' eligibility for work release pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated S 41-2-128(c)(1). http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/davischad.wpd
STATE OF TENNESSEE v. BRIAN MATHIS Court:TCCA Attorneys: Gary F. Antrican, District Public Defender; and David S. Stockton, Assistant Public Defender, Covington, Tennessee, for the appellant, Brian Mathis. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Kim R. Helper, Assistant Attorney General; Elizabeth T. Rice, District Attorney General; and Tracey Brewer, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: WOODALL First Paragraph: Following a bench trial in the General Sessions Court of Lauderdale County, the defendant, Brian Mathis, was found guilty of Class A misdemeanor assault, Tenn. Code Ann. S 39-13-101. He appealed to the Lauderdale County Circuit Court. Defendant was again convicted of misdemeanor assault after a bench trial. The Circuit Court then ordered Defendant to serve eleven months, twenty- nine days, with the sentence suspended upon service of ten days and the remaining time to be served on supervised probation. On appeal to this Court, Defendant challenges his conviction and raises the following issues: (1) whether his use of force against the victim was justified on the ground of self- defense, and (2) whether the State presented sufficient proof to negate his claim of self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/mathisbrian.wpd
PLEASE FORWARD THIS E-MAIL!
GET A FULL-TEXT COPY OF AN OPINION!
SUBSCRIBE TO OPINION FLASH!
For the HTML Text Version:
UNSUBSCRIBE TO OPINION FLASH? ... SURELY NOT!
To STOP receiving TBALink Opinion-Flash:
© Copyright 2002 Tennessee Bar Association