Opinion FlashJanuary 29, 2002Volume 8 — Number 017 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 DEE ANN CURTIS GALLAHER v. CURTIS J. ELAM WITH DISSENTING OPINION Court:TCA Attorneys: Wayne Decatur Wykoff, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the Appellant, Dee Ann Curtis Gallaher L. Caesar Stair, III, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the Appellee, Curtis J. Elam Paul G. Summers, Attorney General & Reporter, and Stuart F. Wilson-Patton, Senior Counsel, Office of the Attorney General, Nashville, Tennessee, for the Intervening Petitioner, State of Tennessee Judge: GODDARD First Paragraph: This is an appeal by the State of Tennessee from a determination of the Juvenile Court of Knox County which held Tenn. Comp. R & Regs. 1240-2-4-.03(4), issued pursuant to T.C.A. 36-5-101, unconstitutional as violative of Section 1 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Dee Ann Curtis Gallaher also appeals, contending that the Trial Court was in error in setting child support. We affirm the Trial Court in its finding the Regulation in question unconstitutional and vacate the judgment as to child support. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/gallaherd_opn.wpd DISSENTING OPINION http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/gallaherd_dis.wpd TOM LOCKETT, et al. v. CHARLES BLALOCK & SONS, INC., et al. Court:TCA Attorneys: Thomas Kenan Smith, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the Appellants, Charles Blalock & Sons, Inc., and Austin Powder Company James Charles Wright, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the Appellees, Tom Lockett and wife, Betty Lockett Judge: GODDARD First Paragraph: In this appeal from the Knox County Circuit Court the Defendants/Appellants, Charles Blalock & Sons, Inc., and Austin Powder Company, contest the Trial Court's award of prejudgment interest to the Plaintiffs/Appellees, Tom Lockett and his wife, Betty Lockett. In addition, both the Plaintiffs and the Defendants appeal the Trial Court's denial of their requests for discretionary costs. We affirm the order of the Trial Court as to both its award of prejudgment interest to the Plaintiffs and its denial of discretionary costs to the Defendants. However, we vacate the Trial Court's order as to its denial of the Plaintiffs' request for discretionary costs and remand for consideration in accord with this opinion. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/locketttom.wpd STATE OF TENNESSEE v. CONNIE LEE ARNOLD Court:TCCA Attorneys: Connie Lee Arnold, Only, Tennessee, Pro Se. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Kathy D. Aslinger, Assistant Attorney General; Joe C. Crumley, Jr., District Attorney General; and Lisa Rice, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: TIPTON First Paragraph: The defendant, Connie Lee Arnold, appeals from the Carter County Criminal Court's denial of his motion for return of property by the state in its prosecution of him and for return of property and files in the possession of his former trial attorney. The trial court concluded that it had no jurisdiction to rule in the matter. The state agrees with the defendant that the trial court has jurisdiction to act on the motion relative to evidence used in the case and otherwise seized and possessed by the state, but it asserts that property and files possessed by the defendant's former attorney should be addressed by the Board of Professional Responsibility or a civil court. Although we hold that the trial court had jurisdiction relative to evidence presented in the case, we affirm the trial court. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/arnoldconnielee.wpd DONALD BLAIR, JR. v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Court:TCCA Attorneys: Albert J. Newman, Jr., Knoxville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Donald Blair, Jr. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Kathy D. Aslinger, Assistant Attorney General; Randall Eugene Nichols, District Attorney General; and Robert L. Jolley, Jr., Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: WILLIAMS First Paragraph: Petitioner failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that he was denied effective assistance of counsel. We affirm the trial court's denial of petitioner's petition for post- conviction relief. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/blairdjr.wpd ELISA COCHRAN v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Court:TCCA Attorneys: Cynthia M. Fort, Nashville, Tennessee, for the Appellant, Elisa Cochran. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; J. Ross Dyer, Assistant Attorney General; Jerry N. Estes, District Attorney General; and William A. Reedy, Assistant District Attorney General, for the Appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: WEDEMEYER First Paragraph: The Petitioner was convicted of felony murder and sentenced to life in prison. This Court affirmed the conviction on direct appeal. The Petitioner subsequently filed a petition for post-conviction relief, alleging that her trial attorney was ineffective. The post-conviction court denied relief, and this appeal ensued. Finding no error, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court denying relief. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/cochrane.wpd STATE OF TENNESSEE v. KEENA D. MATHES Court:TCCA Attorneys: Steve McEwen, Mountain City, Tennessee (on appeal); David F. Bautista, District Public Defender; and Deborah Black Huskins, Assistant District Public Defender, Johnson City, Tennessee (at trial), for the appellant, Keena D. Mathes. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Christine M. Lapps, Assistant Attorney General; Joe C. Crumley, Jr., District Attorney General; and Steven R. Finney, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: GLENN First Paragraph: The defendant was convicted by a jury of reckless aggravated assault, a Class D felony, for cutting the victim's face with a razor blade. The trial court granted her judicial diversion, sentencing her as a Range I, standard offender to two years incarceration, but suspending the sentence and placing her on three years of probation under the supervision of the Department of Correction, including among the conditions that she pay restitution for the victim's medical bills and lost wages. Following extensive testimony as to the defendant's limited financial resources, the trial court ordered as a condition of probation that she legitimate her nine-month-old daughter to ensure that she could meet her financial obligations, including payment of restitution to the victim. In a timely appeal to this court, the defendant raises the sole issue of whether the trial court erred by requiring her to legitimate the younger of her two illegitimate children and seek child support payments for that child. We conclude that the legitimation requirement is a valid condition of probation. However, since a judgment of conviction, although not to be entered following judicial diversion, was entered in this matter, we remand for withdrawal of the judgment, the trial court to then clarify whether the defendant is to be sentenced with the sentence suspended or to be granted judicial diversion. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/matheskeenad.wpd STATE OF TENNESSEE v. HAROLD LEONARD WHITE Court:TCCA Attorneys: Mark E. Stephens, District Public Defender; Paula R. Voss (on appeal), Assistant Public Defender; and Jim D. Owen (at trial), Assistant Public Defender, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the Appellee, Harold Leonard White. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Peter M. Coughlan, Assistant Attorney General; Randall E. Nichols, District Attorney General; and Marsha Selecman, Assistant District Attorney General, for the Appellant, State of Tennessee. Judge: WEDEMEYER First Paragraph: The Defendant was arrested in September 1996 for aggravated assault, being a felon in possession of a firearm, and fleeing. His case was not set for trial until July 2000. The Defendant moved for dismissal of the charges on the ground that he had been denied his constitutional right to a speedy trial. The trial court granted the Defendant's motion, and the State now appeals as of right. Concluding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding that the Defendant was prejudiced by the delay, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/whitehl.wpd PLEASE FORWARD THIS E-MAIL! GET A FULL-TEXT COPY OF AN OPINION! JOIN TBALink! SUBSCRIBE TO OPINION FLASH! For the HTML Text Version: UNSUBSCRIBE TO OPINION FLASH? ... SURELY NOT! To STOP receiving TBALink Opinion-Flash: Home • Contact Us • PageFinder • What's New • Help |
|
© Copyright 2002 Tennessee Bar Association
|