Opinion Flash

July 18, 2002
Volume 8 — Number 123

Following this index are summaries of each case, including its name, first paragraph, author's name, and the names of attorneys for the parties of each opinion.

This Issue (IN THIS ORDER):
 
03 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
08 New Opinion(s) from the Tennessee Court of Appeals
08 New Opinion(s) from the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals
02 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
 

TBA members can get the full-text versions of these opinions three ways detailed below. All methods require a TBA username and password. If you have forgotten your password, you can look it up on-line at http://www.tba.org/getpassword.mgi . If you are a TBA member, but do not have a username and password, you can receive one online at http://www.tba.org/signup.mgi. Here's how you can obtain full-text version.

Click the URL at end of each Opinion paragraph below. This option will allow you to download the original document.

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.

Howard H. Vogel
Knoxville, Tennessee
Editor-in-Chief, TBALink


These BellSouth opinions were consolidated for oral argument and
are both addressed in a single attached opinion.  Originally released
07/10/02, the opinion today contains a correction on page 2.

BELLSOUTH ADVERTISING & PUBLISHING CORPORATION 
v. TENNESSEE REGULATORY AUTHORITY 

AND

BELLSOUTH ADVERTISING & PUBLISHING CORPORATION v. NEXTLINK TENNESSEE

Court:TSC

Attorneys:   

J. Richard Collier and Julie M. Woodruff, Nashville, Tennessee, for
the appellant, Tennessee Regulatory Authority.

Henry Walker, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellants, AT&T
Communications of South Central States, Inc., MCI Worldcom Network
Services, Inc., and XO Tennessee, Inc.

Paul S. Davidson and Guilford F. Thornton, Jr., Nashville, Tennessee,
Daniel J. Thompson, Jr., Tucker, Georgia, and James F. Bogan, III,
Atlanta, Georgia, for the appellee, BellSouth Advertising & Publishing
Corporation.                       

Judge: BIRCH

First Paragraph:

This consolidated appeal presents two very important issues.  They
are:  (1) whether the Tennessee Regulatory Authority has the authority
to require that the names and logos of local telephone service
providers who compete with BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc. be
included on the cover of white pages telephone directories published
by BellSouth Advertising & Publishing Corporation on behalf of
BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc.; and (2) whether the Tennessee
Regulatory Authority's decisions in these consolidated cases violate
the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.  For the
reasons discussed herein, we hold that the Tennessee Regulatory
Authority is authorized to require that the names and logos of
competing local telephone service providers be included on the covers
of the white pages telephone directories published on behalf of
BellSouth Telecommunications, Inc., and that the Tennessee Regulatory
Authority's decisions in these two cases do not violate the First
Amendment.  Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the Court of
Appeals in this consolidated appeal and reinstate the judgments of the
Tennessee Regulatory Authority.

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC/bellsouthcorrection.wpd

IN RE EDWARD JAMES CRIM SR., AND JAYNE CRIM;
EVA M. LEMEH, Trustee v. EMC MORTGAGE CORPORATION

Court:TSC

Attorneys:

Robert H. Waldschmidt, Nashville, Tennessee, for the Appellant, Eva M.
Lemeh, Trustee

David B. Herbert and Michael Gigandet, Nashville, Tennessee, for the
Appellee, EMC Mortgage Corporation.

Judge: DROWOTA

First Paragraph:

Pursuant to Rule 23 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of Tennessee,
this Court accepted certification of the following questions from the
United States Bankruptcy Court for the Middle District of Tennessee:

(a)  Whether the deed of trust was improperly acknowledged under
Tennessee law;

(b) If so, does the defective acknowledgment render the deed of trust
void or voidable by a judicial lien creditor or a bona fide purchaser?

Because the acknowledgment does not indicate that the wife was signing
on behalf of her husband and because the certificate of acknowledgment
does not substantially comply with the statutorily prescribed forms,
the deed of trust is null and void as to judicial lien creditors and
bona fide purchasers with respect to the transfer of the husband's
interest in the property.   Because the acknowledgment of the wife's
signature substantially complies with the statutorily prescribed
forms, the deed of trust is effective to transfer her right of
survivorship in the property and is not voidable by a judicial lien
creditor or bona fide purchaser without notice.

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC/inrecrime.wpd

CORRECTION: (Originally released 07/09/02; filed today with a
correction on page 4.)

WOO-JUN KI, et al. v. THE STATE OF TENNESSEE

Court:TSC

Attorneys:

Barbara Hawley Smith and William Daniel Leader, Jr., Nashville,
Tennessee, for the appellants, Woo-Jun Ki and Jeong-Gyung Ki.

Alan M. Parker, Knoxville, Tennessee; and Paul G. Summers, Attorney
General and Reporter; Michael E. Moore, Solicitor General; and
Kimberly J. Dean, Deputy Attorney General, for the appellee, State of
Tennessee.                    

Judge: HOLDER

First Paragraph:

We granted appeal to determine the meaning of "claimant" in Tenn. Code
Ann. S 9-8-307(e) when an action for wrongful death is filed against
the State.  We hold that the decedent is the sole "claimant" under
Tenn. Code Ann. S 9-8-307(e), as contemplated by Tenn. Code Ann. S
20-5-106(a) and Tenn. Code Ann. S 20-5-113.  The award of damages is
therefore limited to $300,000 pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. S 9-8-307. 
The judgment of the Court of Appeals is affirmed, and the case is
remanded to the trial court for proceedings consistent with this
opinion.

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC/kiwoojuncorrect.wpd

ROBERT W. CHAGRASULIS, M.D. v. TENNESSEE BOARD OF MEDICAL EXAMINERS

Court:TCA

Attorneys:

Frank J. Scanlon, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Robert W.
Chagrasulis, M.D.

Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Sue A. Sheldon, Senior
Counsel, Health Care Division, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

Judge: CANTRELL

First Paragraph:

Appellant lost his license to practice medicine in the State of Maine.
 He later relocated to Tennessee and filed an application for a
license to practice medicine.  The Tennessee Board of Medical
Examiners (the "Board") denied his application based on the
disciplinary action taken against him in the State of Maine.  The
Davidson County Chancery Court affirmed the Board's decision. 
Appellant now appeals the Davidson County Chancery Court's decision to
this court and asserts that the Board's decision was arbitrary and
capricious or an abuse of discretion.  We affirm the trial court's
decision.

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/chagrasulisrw.wpd

CONSUMER ADVOCATE DIVISION v. TENNESSEE REGULATORY AUTHORITY

Court:TCA

Attorneys:  

John Knox Walkup, Attorney General & Reporter; Michael E. Moore,
Solicitor General; L. Vincent Williams, Consumer Advocate; Vance L.
Broemel, Assistant Attorney General, for appellant, Consumer Advocate
Division.

Guy M. Hicks, Nashville, Tennessee and Patrick William Turner,
Atlanta, Georgia, for appellee, BellSouth Telecommunications.

Citizens Telecommunication Company, Pro Se.

Dennis McNamee, J. Richard Collier and William Valerius Sanford,
Nashville, Tennessee, and H. Edward Phillips, Wake Forest, North
Carolina, for appellee, Tennessee Regulatory Authority.

Joseph F. Welborn, Robert Dale Grimes and Theodore G. Pappas,
Nashville, Tennessee for appellee, United Telephone Southeast, Inc.   
                    
Judge:  CANTRELL

First Paragraph:

The principal issue in this case is whether telephone directory
assistance service is basic or non-basic under the statutory scheme. 
Secondary issues involve the practice of grandfathering existing
customers when a new tariff is approved, the exemptions to directory
assistance charges, and whether the Tennessee Regulatory Authority was
authorized to transfer a contested case to another docket.  We affirm.

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/consumeradvocatediv.wpd

KIMBERLY LYNN HAAS v. ALBERT JAMES HAAS.

Court:TCA

Attorneys:

R. Eddie Davidson, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Kimberly
Lynn Haas.

Phillip Robinson, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Albert James
Haas.                     

Judge: ASH

First Paragraph:

In this appeal from the Davidson County Circuit Court, the Appellant,
Kimberly Lynn Haas, questions whether the trial court erred in
granting her an absolute divorce and rendering a final disposition of
the parties' marital property, whether the trial court erred in
denying the appellant's motion for judgment on the pleadings, whether
the trial court erred in refusing to bifurcate the issues of liability
and damages to the appellee's two antique chairs, whether the trial
court erred in its division of the appellant's 401K Deferred
Compensation Plan, whether the trial court erred in permitting the
appellee to assert the Fifth Amendment on the issues of dissipation of
marital assets and adultery, whether the trial court erred in refusing
to meaningfully consider the appellant's gift of $25,000 to the
appellee in dividing the parties' property, whether the trial court
erred in awarding the appellee the Toyota 4-Runner, whether the trial
court erred in awarding the appellee the rosewood antique table,
whether the trial court erred in awarding the appellee the $2,500
General Motors Cash Rebate, whether the trial court erred in not
requiring the appellee to assume any of the outstanding marital debt
on the Honda Accord, whether the trial court erred in its division of
the General Motors credit card debt, and the method of payment of such
marital debt.  We affirm the judgment of the trial court in part,
reverse in part and remand as consistent with this opinion.  Costs of
this appeal shall be split between the parties.

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/haaskl.wpd

IN THE MATTER OF:  S.G.S.

Court:TCA

Attorneys:

F. Michie Gibson, Jr., Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, R.A.S.

Anthony E. Hagan, Lebanon, Tennessee, for the appellees, R.C.D and
S.D.D.                        

Judge: CANTRELL

First Paragraph:

The trial court terminated the parental rights of the biological
father on the ground of abandonment, and granted the adoption petition
of the stepfather.  The biological father argues on appeal that he did
not abandon his child.  We affirm the trial court.

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/inthematterofsgs.wpd

ERIN MONEYMAKER EARLEY v. ROBERT A. MONEYMAKER

Court:TCA

Attorneys:   

Jerrold L. Becker, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the Appellant Robert A.
Moneymaker.


H. Gene Bell and Anthony M. Avery, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the
Appellee Erin Moneymaker Earley.                       

Judge: SWINEY

First Paragraph:

The parties to this action were divorced in 1999, and pursuant to the
final decree, Erin Moneymaker Earley ("Mother") was awarded sole
custody of the parties' young daughter, with Robert A. Moneymaker
("Father") having visitation.  Over two years later, Father filed a
petition requesting a change in custody.  The Trial Court concluded
Father failed to prove there had been a material change in
circumstances justifying a change in custody and denied the petition. 
Father appeals, and we affirm.

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/moneymakere.wpd

BOB PATTERSON, TRUSTEE OF SHELBY COUNTY, TENNESSEE v. JIM ROUT, MAYOR
OF SHELBY COUNTY, TENNESSEE

Court:TCA

Attorneys:

Alan G. Crone, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellant, Jim Rout, Mayor
of Shelby County, Tennessee.

Joedae L. Jenkins and Tyrone J. Paylor, Memphis, Tennessee, for the
appellee, Bob Patterson, Trustee of Shelby County, Tennessee.                       

Judge: FARMER

First Paragraph:

This appeal concerns the application of the Shelby County Civil
Service Merit Act to appointed employment positions in Shelby County. 
The trial court found that since the positions were appointed by the
County Trustee, they were exempt from the Act. The chancellor
accordingly held that the Human Resources Department does not have the
authority to override salary decisions of the Trustee with respect to
appointed positions, and that petitions for salary increases could be
made to the court pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. S 8-20-101, et. seq. 
The chancellor approved three of the Trustee's five requested
increases, finding them reasonable and necessary.  We hold that the
trial court's interpretation of the Merit Act was only partially
correct.  We remand this case for  further proceedings consistent with
this opinion for a determination of whether the appointed employees
are classified or unclassified.

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/pattersonbob1.wpd

TEAM DESIGN, et al. v. ANTHONY GOTTLIEB, et al.

Court:TCA

Attorneys: 

S. Ralph Gordon, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Intersound
Entertainment, Inc.

James H. Harris III, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Anthony
Gottlieb.

Daniel B. Eisenstein, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellees, Team
Design and Harris Graphics, Inc.                         

Judge: KOCH

First Paragraph:

This appeal raises important issues regarding the permissible range of
court-annexed alternative dispute resolution procedures available
under Tenn. S. Ct. R. 31.  The case began in the Davidson County
General Sessions Court as a dispute over payment for artwork and
graphic design for a country music album.  All the parties were
dissatisfied with the general sessions court's disposition of their
claims and perfected de novo appeals to the Circuit Court for Davidson
County.  When a dispute arose over the inability of two of the parties
to be present on the agreed-upon trial date, the trial court, with all
parties' agreement, entered an order referring the case to "binding
mediation."  The trial court conducted separate, off-the-record
discussions with each of the parties and then entered an order finally
adjudicating their claims.  One of the parties filed a Tenn. R. Civ.
P. 59.04 motion objecting to the order on the ground that it had not
agreed to waive its right to a trial if the outcome of the mediation
was unsatisfactory.  After the trial court denied its motion, the
moving party perfected this appeal.  We have determined that the trial
court lacked authority to conduct binding mediation or to finally
adjudicate the parties' claims.  Accordingly, we vacate the final
order.

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/teamdesign.wpd

SUSAN KLAMON WHITON (LEEDOM) v. ALAN LOUIS WHITON

Court:TCA

Attorneys:   

Sarah Yarber Sheppeard and Jason H. Long, Knoxville, Tennessee, for
the Appellant, Alan L. Whiton

Dale Alan Everett, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the Appellee, Susan K.
Whiton (Leedom)

Paul G. Summers, Attorney General & Reporter, and  Kim Beals,
Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Attorney General, Nashville,
Tennessee, for the Intervening Petitioner, State of Tennessee                       

Judge: GODDARD

First Paragraph:

This is a post-divorce proceeding that began with the Mother's
petition for an increase in child support.  The Trial Court increased
the child support and ordered a trust fund set up for the minor child.
 The Trial Court held that the child support guidelines was
constitutional.  Father appealed claiming that Tenn. Comp. R & Regs.
1240-2-4-.03(4), issued pursuant to T.C.A. 36-5-101, was violative of
Section 1 of the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United
States. Mother also appeals raising various issues. We reverse the
Trial Court in its finding the Regulation in question is
constitutional and vacate the judgment as to child support. We affirm
in part the other holdings of the Trial Court as to a part of the 
issues raised by Mother.

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/whitonsusan_opn.wpd

SUSAN KLAMON WHITON (LEEDOM) v. ALAN LOUIS WHITON

Court:TCA

FRANKS DISSENTING

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/whitonsusan_dis.wpd

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. RICKY LYNN EARLS

Court:TCCA

Attorneys:

Gregory D. Smith, Clarksville, Tennessee (on appeal); Donna Leigh
Hargrove, District Public Defender; and Andrew Jackson Dearing, III,
Assistant Public Defender (at trial and on appeal), for the appellant,
Ricky Lynn Earls.

Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; J. Ross Dyer,
Assistant Attorney General; William Michael McCown, District Attorney
General; and Weakley E. (Eddie) Barnard, Assistant District Attorney
General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.                        

Judge: WILLIAMS

First Paragraph:

Defendant appeals the sentences he received from convictions for two
counts of forgery and one count of theft.  The trial court found
defendant to be a career offender and sentenced defendant to serve two
sentences of six years each, to be served consecutively for an
effective sentence of twelve years.  Defendant contends that the
sentences are excessive and that the trial court should have ordered
the sentences to be served concurrently.  We disagree and affirm the
trial court's judgment.

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/earlsrl1.wpd

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JASON BRIAN HARGROVE

Court:TCCA

Attorneys:

Thomas A. Davidson, Lewisburg, Tennessee, for the appellant, Jason
Brian Hargrove.

Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Mark A. Fulks,
Assistant Attorney General; W. Michael McCown, District Attorney
General; and Weakley E. Barnard, Assistant District Attorney General,
for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

Judge: MCGEE OGLE

First Paragraph:

The appellant, Jason Brian Hargrove, pled guilty in the Marshall
County Circuit Court to numerous counts of theft and burglary.  He
received a total effective sentence of twenty years incarceration in
the Tennessee Department of Correction.  On appeal, the appellant
raises the following issue for our review: whether the trial court
erred in imposing consecutive sentences.  After reviewing the record
and the parties' briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/hargrovejb.wpd

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. PHILIP R. HAVEN

Court:TCCA

Attorneys:

Lee Offman, Franklin, Tennessee, for appellant, Philip R. Haven.

Paul G. Summers, Attorney General & Reporter; Thomas E. Williams, III,
Assistant Attorney General; Ron Davis, District Attorney General; and
Lee Dryer, Assistant District Attorney General, for appellee, State of
Tennessee.                      

Judge: SMITH

First Paragraph:

A Williamson County grand jury indicted the defendant on alternative
counts of driving under the influence of an intoxicant and of driving
with a .10% or more alcohol concentration in his blood or breath.  At
the conclusion of the proof, the trial jury convicted the defendant of
the latter offense and assessed a fifteen hundred dollar fine.  At
sentencing, the trial court approved the fine assessed and further
sentenced the defendant to six months to be suspended after the
service of thirty days, day for day. Additionally, the  court placed
the defendant on supervised probation for eleven months and
twenty-nine days during which time, among other conditions, the
defendant was to complete alcohol safety school. Subsequently, the
defendant filed a motion for a new trial or judgment of acquittal,
which the trial court denied. Through this appeal the defendant
contends that the trial court erred in 1) not excusing four jurors for
cause; 2) permitting the prosecutor to make ingratiating statements to
the jury during voir dire; 3) overruling counsel's objection to the
prosecutor's comment in opening statement that the defendant was
"drunk, way too drunk to drive"; 4) finding that the involved forensic
scientist for the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation was the custodian
of the alcohol report, thereby allowing the admission of the report
into evidence; 5) concluding that "adult driving while impaired" was
not a lesser included offense of driving under the influence; 6)
refusing to dismiss count two of the indictment as a nullity; and 7)
sentencing the defendant to more than the seven-consecutive-day
minimum sentence applicable here. After reviewing each of these
assertions, we find that none merit relief and, therefore, affirm the
defendant's conviction and sentence. However, in reviewing the case,
we have observed an error in the judgment form and, therefore, remand
the matter for entry of a corrected judgment.

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/havenphilip.wpd

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. EDWARD LUCAS

Court:TCCA

Attorneys:

Roger E. Nell, Clarksville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Edward
Lucas.

Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Christine M. Lapps,
Assistant Attorney General; John W. Carney, Jr., District Attorney
General; and C. Dan Brollier, Jr., Assistant District Attorney
General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.                        

Judge: MCGEE OGLE

First Paragraph:

The appellant, Edward Lucas, was convicted in the Montgomery County
Circuit Court of two counts of selling cocaine and one count of
possession of marijuana with the intent to sell.  The trial court
imposed an effective sentence of six years incarceration in the
Tennessee Department of Correction, sixty days of which were to be
served in confinement with the remainder to be served on probation. 
Subsequently, the trial court found the appellant guilty of violating
his probation and ordered the appellant to serve his sentence in
confinement.  The appellant raises the following issues on appeal: (1)
whether the allegation set forth in the violation of probation warrant
states a violation of the conditions of probation; (2) whether the
allegation set forth in the violation of probation warrant complies
with due process requirements of the United States and Tennessee
Constitutions; and (3) whether the evidence is sufficient to support
the probation revocation.  Upon review of the record and the parties'
briefs, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/lucase.wpd

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. DELANEY E. MARCUM

Court:TCCA

Attorneys:

John H. Henderson, District Public Defender, Franklin, Tennessee, for
the Appellant, Delaney E. Marcum.

Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Michael Moore,
Solicitor General; P. Robin Dixon, Jr., Assistant Attorney General;
Ronald L. Davis, District Attorney General; and Lee Dryer, Assistant
District Attorney General, for the Appellee, State of Tennessee.                     

Judge: HAYES

First Paragraph:

The Appellant, Delaney E. Marcum, appeals from the sentencing decision
of the Williamson County Circuit Court.  Marcum entered guilty pleas
to one count of aggravated burglary, a class C felony, and one count
of theft of property over $1,000.00, a class D felony.  Under the
terms of the agreement, Marcum received concurrent sentences of five
years for aggravated burglary and four years for theft.  Following a
sentencing hearing, the trial court ordered that Marcum's sentences be
served in the Department of Correction and, additionally, he was
ordered to pay restitution on both counts.  On appeal, Marcum contends
that the trial court erred in (1) not sentencing him to probation or
any other alternative to incarceration, and (2) ordering restitution
in conjunction with total confinement.  Finding no error, the judgment
of the Williamson County Circuit Court is affirmed.

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/marcumdelaneye.wpd

(This is a new corrected opinion filed pursuant to a previous CCA
Order dated  6/27/02  which states that the opinion AND judgment
previously entered on 6/24/02  are being Vacated and Withdrawn and a
corrected opinion and judgment will be filed in due course.) 

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. RHONDA PATRICIA MAYES

Court:TCCA

Attorneys:

Mark C. Scruggs, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Rhonda
Patricia Mayes.

Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Patricia C. Kussmann,
Assistant Attorney General; William Michael McCown, District Attorney
General; and Weakley E. (Eddie) Barnard, Assistant District Attorney
General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.                          

Judge: WILLIAMS

First Paragraph:

Defendant was convicted of two counts of possession of cocaine with
intent to sell and two counts of simple possession of cocaine.  The
trial court merged the two counts of possession of cocaine with intent
to sell into one count and merged the two counts of simple possession
of cocaine into one count.  The trial court sentenced the defendant to
concurrent sentences of eight years and eleven months and twenty-nine
days, respectively, thus imposing an effective eight-year sentence. 
Defendant appealed on four grounds: (1) there was insufficient
evidence to support the conviction for possession with intent to sell
cocaine; (2) a search warrant failed to state sufficient facts to
establish probable cause to search defendant's apartment; (3)  the
indictment was multiplicitous; and (4) the trial court erred in ruling
that the State could use defendant's prior conviction to show intent. 
We conclude that all convictions should merge into a single judgment
of conviction for possession of cocaine with intent to sell; thus, we
vacate the sentence relating to simple possession of cocaine, although
this will not change the effective eight-year sentence.

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/mayesrp1.wpd

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JACK ROGER NORTON

Court:TCCA

Attorneys:

Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Kathy D. Aslinger,
Assistant Attorney General; Joe Crumley, District Attorney General;
and Steve Finney, Assistant District Attorney General, for the
appellant, State of Tennessee.

James T. Bowman, Johnson City, Tennessee, for the appellee, Jack Roger
Norton.                         

Judge: WOODALL

First Paragraph:

The State has appealed from the trial court's order granting the
Motion to Suppress filed by Defendant, Jack Roger Norton.  Defendant
is the owner of a tavern in Washington County, which was the subject
of a valid search warrant.  It is undisputed that the officers did not
"knock and announce" prior to their entry into the building to execute
the warrant.  This failure was the basis of the trial court's ruling. 
After a thorough review of the record, the applicable law, and based
upon the specific, narrow issue presented, we reverse the judgment of
the trial court.

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/nortonjack_opn.wpd

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JACK ROGER NORTON

Court:TCCA

SMITH CONCURRING

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/nortonjack_con.wpd

DEADRICK M. PIGG v. STATE OF TENNESSEE

Court:TCCA

Attorneys:

Larry B. Felts, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Deadrick M.
Pigg.

Paul G. Summers, Attorney General & Reporter; Peter M. Coughlan,
Assistant Attorney General; Victor S. Johnson, District Attorney
General; and Grady Moore, Assistant District Attorney General, for the
appellee, the State of Tennessee.                         

Judge: SMITH

First Paragraph:

A Davidson County grand jury indicted the defendant on one count of
felonious unlawful possession of a weapon and one count of misdemeanor
evading arrest. Following a jury trial, the defendant was acquitted of
the weapons offense but convicted of evading arrest. At the conclusion
of a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced the defendant to
eleven months and twenty-nine days for this conviction.  The court
also ordered this sentence to run consecutively to another sentence
stemming from a separate arrest.  The defendant next unsuccessfully
filed a motion for a judgment of acquittal or, in the alternative, a
new trial. Through this appeal he continues to assert that the
evidence is insufficient to support his conviction. However, after
reviewing the record, we find that this issue lacks merit and,
therefore, affirm the defendant's conviction for evading arrest.

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/piggdeadrick.wpd

Service of Process under 2002 Tenn. Pub. Acts Ch. 794

Date: July 15, 2002

Opinion Number: 02-079                         

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/AG/2002/OP79.pdf

Determination of Payments in Lieu of Taxes 
by McMinnville Electric System

Date: July 15, 2002

Opinion Number: 02-080                         

http://www.tba.org/tba_files/AG/2002/OP80.pdf

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 THE TENNESSEE BAR ASSOCIATION!
While Opinion Flash is a free service of the Tennessee Bar Association, you must be a member of the Tennessee Bar Association in order to access the full text of the opinions or enjoy the many other features of TBALink.

To join the TBA go to: http://www.tba.org/join_bar.mgi

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! Sign up for text or HTML version.

Visit the TBALink web site at: http://www.tba.org/op-flash.mgi

UNSUBSCRIBE TO OPINION FLASH? ... SURELY NOT!

But if you must, visit the TBALink web site at: http://www.tba.org/op-flash.mgi

© Copyright 2002 Tennessee Bar Association