Opinion FlashAugust 2, 2002Volume 8 — Number 134 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.
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.
Howard H. Vogel MICHAEL EUGENE SAMPLE, et al. v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Court:TSC Attorneys: David M. Eldridge, Knoxville, Tennessee, and Harry R. Reinhart, Columbus, Ohio, for the appellant, Michael Eugene Sample. Michael E. Moore, Solicitor General; Jennifer L. Smith and Erik W. Daab, Assistant Attorneys General; William L. Gibbons, District Attorney General; and Reginald Henderson and John W. Campbell, Assistant District Attorneys General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: ANDERSON First Paragraph: We granted review in this post-conviction capital case to address two issues: (1) whether the trial court properly ruled that the petitioner's claim that the prosecution suppressed exculpatory evidence was barred by the statute of limitations; and (2) whether the trial court properly determined that the jury's reliance on the felony murder aggravating circumstance in imposing a death sentence for the offense of felony murder in violation of article I, S 16 of the Tennessee Constitution was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt. The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the denial of post-conviction relief. After carefully reviewing the record and applicable authority, we hold that our decision in Wright v. State, 987 S.W.2d 26 (Tenn. 1999), did not create a per se rule requiring the dismissal of all late-arising suppression of exculpatory evidence claims, and that the record in this case preponderates against the trial court's determination that the petitioner's liberty interest in raising such an issue was outweighed by the State's interest in finality. We therefore remand for further proceedings on this claim. We further hold that the violation of article I, S 16 of the Tennessee Constitution under the present facts in the record was harmless error beyond a reasonable doubt under State v. Howell, 868 S.W.2d 238 (Tenn. 1993). We therefore reverse the Court of Criminal Appeals' judgment and remand to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC/samplem_opn.wpd MICHAEL EUGENE SAMPLE, et al. v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Court:TSC BARKER CONCURRING IN PART, DISSENTING IN PART http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC/samplem_dis.wpd MICHAEL EUGENE SAMPLE, et al. v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Court:TSC DROWOTA CONCURRING http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TSC/samplem_con.wpd NICOLE JEAN KEELER v. MICHAEL WINN KEELER Court:TCA Attorneys: Andrew M. Cate, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Nicole Jean Keeler. Andrea C. Rawlings, Clarksville, Tennessee, for the appellee, Michael Winn Keeler. Judge: CANTRELL First Paragraph: In this divorce case, the trial court awarded the parties joint custody of their minor children, with primary physical custody awarded to the father. The mother contends on appeal that she is the more fit parent and should have been given primary custody. We affirm the trial court. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/keelernicole.wpd DON SHAFER, et al. v. CITY OF DICKSON, BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS, et al. Court:TCA Attorneys: Tony L. Turnbow, Franklin, Tennessee, for the appellants, Don Shafer and Mary Shafer. Dudley M. West, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellees, Welton Investments and Premier Construction Company, LLC. Jerry V. Smith, Dickson, Tennessee, for the appellee, City of Dickson, Board of Zoning Appeals. Judge: COTTRELL First Paragraph: Petitioners sought common-law writ of certiorari in suit against Board of Zoning Appeals, owner of property, and contractor, after the Board granted a request for a setback variance to allow construction of a proposed convenience store in Dickson, Tennessee, and the Board declined to reconsider its decision. The trial court granted the Respondents' Motion to Dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction because the petition was filed outside the mandatory, jurisdictional time requirement set forth in Tenn. Code Ann. S 27-9-102. We affirm the decision of the trial court because the petition was not filed within the time limitation set forth in the statute and no basis was shown for tolling the limitation period. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/shaferdon.wpd ROGER DALE THOMAS v. GAIL THOMAS Court:TCA Attorneys: Robert L. Marlow, Shelbyville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Roger Dale Thomas. Joseph Ward Henry, Jr., Pulaski, Tennessee, for the appellee, Gail C. Thomas. Judge: COTTRELL First Paragraph: This appeal involves a husband's objection to the classification, valuation, and distribution of the parties' property made by the trial court as part of the divorce. The parties agreed to and participated in a procedurally unconventional process for submitting the property issues to the court. Each party met separately with the trial court, submitted her and his respective positions regarding the classification and valuation of the parties' property, and submitted proposed distribution plans and other "exhibits" and documentation. After meeting with each party separately in chambers, the trial court ordered the property to be divided according to the wife's proposal. Because neither a transcript nor a statement of the evidence taken by the trial court was filed, we must affirm the trial court's judgment on the very fact-specific issues raised by the husband. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/thomasr_opn.wpd ROGER DALE THOMAS v. GAIL THOMAS Court:TCA KOCH CONCURRING http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/thomasr_con.wpd STATE OF TENNESSEE v. ISRAEL MICHUA CAMACHO Court:TCCA Attorneys: Edward L. Kershaw, Greeneville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Israel Michua Camacho. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Mark A. Fulks, Assistant Attorney General; C. Berkeley Bell, Jr., District Attorney General; and Eric D. Christiansen, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: TIPTON First Paragraph: The defendant, Israel Michua Camacho, appeals his convictions in the Greene County Criminal Court for facilitation of possession of one-half gram or more of cocaine with intent to deliver, a Class C felony, and facilitation of possession of not less than ten pounds nor more than seventy pounds of marijuana with intent to deliver, a Class E felony. The trial court sentenced him as a Range I, standard offender to concurrent sentences of four years in the Tennessee Department of Correction for the facilitation of possession of cocaine conviction and two years for the facilitation of possession of marijuana conviction. The defendant claims that the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions and that he deserves a new trial because the state failed to provide the defense with a discoverable videotape in a timely manner. We affirm the judgments of the trial court. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/camachoIm1.wpd STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JAMES ALFRED CAREY Court:TCCA Attorneys: Randy P. Lucas, Gallatin, Tennessee, for the Appellant, James Alfred Carey. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General; Jennifer L. Bledsoe, Assistant Attorney General; Lawrence Ray Whitley, District Attorney General; and Dee David Gay, Assistant District Attorney General, for the Appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: WEDEMEYER First Paragraph: The Defendant pled guilty to one count of selling less than 0.5 grams of cocaine, a Schedule II controlled substance, and to three counts of domestic assault. The trial court sentenced the Defendant as a Range II, multiple offender to ten years incarceration for the drug conviction and to eleven months and twenty-nine days for each of the assault convictions. The trial court ordered that the sentences be served concurrently, but consecutive to a prior sentence. The Defendant now appeals, arguing that he was improperly sentenced. Finding no error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/careyja.wpd STATE OF TENNESSEE v. DERRICK S. CHANEY Court:TCCA Attorneys: Gene Honea, Assistant Public Defender (on appeal), and John H. Henderson, Jr., District Public Defender, Franklin, Tennessee (at trial), for the Appellant, Derrick S. Chaney. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Kim R. Helper, Assistant Attorney General; Ronald L. Davis, District Attorney General; and Derek K. Smith, Assistant District Attorney General, for the Appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: WEDEMEYER First Paragraph: The Defendant pleaded guilty to first offense DUI, for which he was sentenced to eleven months and twenty-nine days incarceration, suspended after service of forty-eight hours; and to driving with a suspended, cancelled, or revoked license, for which he was sentenced to six months incarceration, suspended after service of forty-eight hours. The trial court ordered that the two sentences be served concurrently. The Defendant was subsequently arrested for probation violation, and the trial court conducted a hearing to determine whether the Defendant's probation should be revoked. At the conclusion of the hearing, the trial court ordered that the Defendant serve the remainder of his sentences in custody. The Defendant appeals this decision, arguing that the State failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that he had violated his probation and that the trial court erred by ordering him to serve his full sentence in custody. We conclude that sufficient evidence was presented at the hearing to support revocation of the Defendant's probation and that the trial court did not err by ordering the Defendant to serve his sentence in custody. We thus affirm the judgment of the trial court. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/chaneyds.wpd BLAKE E. HALLUM v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Court:TCCA Attorneys: Michael Noel, at trial and sentencing; and David A. Gold, post-conviction, Nashville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Blake E. Hallum. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General & Reporter; John H. Bledsoe, Assistant Attorney General; Victor S. Johnson, District Attorney General; and Katrin Miller, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, the State of Tennessee. Judge: SMITH First Paragraph: A Davidson County jury convicted the petitioner, Blake Edward Hallum, of felony murder and especially aggravated robbery, and the trial court sentenced the petitioner to serve consecutive sentences of life imprisonment for his felony murder conviction and 17 years for his especially aggravated robbery conviction. The petitioner appealed his convictions to this Court, and we affirmed the judgment of the trial court. See State v. Richard Bruce Halfacre, No. 01C01-9703-CR- 00083, 1998 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 1117, at *1 (Tenn. Crim. App. at Nashville, Oct. 29, 1998). The petitioner sought post-conviction relief, and the trial court denied his petition after a hearing on the merits. The petitioner now appeals the trial court's denial of his petition for post-conviction relief, alleging that he is entitled to post-conviction relief because a state's trial witness testified at the post-conviction hearing and contradicted her trial testimony, invoked her Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, and/or pleaded lack of memory in response to questions about the truthfulness of her trial testimony. After reviewing the record and applicable case law, we find that the petitioner's claim does not merit relief. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/hallumblake.wpd MARIO HAWKINS v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Court:TCCA Attorneys: Dwight E. Scott, Nashville, Tennessee, for appellant, Mario Hawkins. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General & Reporter; T.E. Williams, III, Assistant Attorney General; Victor S. Johnson, District Attorney General; and Kimberly Haas, Assistant District Attorney General, for appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: SMITH First Paragraph: After a juvenile court transferred the petitioner's case, a Davidson County grand jury indicted the petitioner on one count of first degree murder. Following a jury trial, the petitioner stood convicted of this offense and for this conviction received a life sentence. Thereafter he unsuccessfully sought relief through a direct appeal. See State v. Mario Hawkins, No. 01C01-9701- CR-00014, 1998 Tenn. Crim. App. LEXIS 685, at *2, *21 (Tenn. Crim. App. at Nashville, July 2, 1998). Subsequently, he filed a pro se petition for post-conviction relief and was appointed counsel. Counsel filed an amended petition alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel. After conducting a hearing on this matter, the trial court denied the petitioner the relief requested. Through this appeal the petitioner continues to assert that trial counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to adequately investigate the petitioner's mental health and utilize this information as a defense to the first degree murder charge. However, after reviewing this assertion, we find it to lack merit. We, therefore, affirm the trial court's denial of the post-conviction petition. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/hawkinsmario.wpd STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JENNY BEA HUFFSTETLER Court:TCCA Attorneys: Mack Garner, Maryville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Jenny Bea Huffstetler. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Elizabeth B. Marney, Assistant Attorney General; Mike Flynn, District Attorney General; and Tammy Harrington, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: WELLES First Paragraph: The Defendant, Jenny Bea Huffstetler, pled guilty to three counts of forgery, one count of fraudulent use of a credit card, one count of misdemeanor assault, and one count of theft under $500. For these offenses, the Defendant received an effective sentence of three years as a Range I, standard offender. Her sentence was suspended and she was placed on intensive probation. Following a hearing on allegations that the Defendant had violated the terms of her probation, the trial court ordered the Defendant to serve nine months in jail and the balance of her sentence on community corrections. The Defendant now appeals. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/huffstetlerjb.wpd STATE OF TENNESSEE v. TERRY STEWART MOORE Court:TCCA Attorneys: Michael H. Meares (on appeal and at trial) and Charles Dungan (at trial), Maryville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Terry Stewart Moore. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General & Reporter; Angele M. Gregory, Assistant Attorney General; and Tammy Harrington and William B. Reed, Assistant District Attorneys General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: WADE First Paragraph: The defendant, Terry Stewart Moore, was convicted of voluntary manslaughter. See Tenn. Code Ann. S 39-13-211. The trial court imposed a Range II sentence of 10 years. In this appeal of right, the defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence and argues that the trial court erred by the admission of certain evidence. The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/moorets.wpd STATE OF TENNESSEE v. TIMOTHY KEN SEXTON Court:TCCA Attorneys: Donna Robinson Miller, Chattanooga, Tennessee (on appeal), and Michael Acuff, Chattanooga, Tennessee (at trial), for the Appellant, Timothy Ken Sexton. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Patricia C. Kussmann, Assistant Attorney General; William H. Cox, III, District Attorney General; and Rodney C. Strong, Assistant District Attorney General, for the Appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: WEDEMEYER First Paragraph: The Hamilton County Grand Jury indicted the fifteen-year-old Defendant, charging him with second degree murder. Following a transfer hearing, the Defendant was tried as an adult. A Hamilton County jury found the Defendant guilty of the indicted charge, and the trial court sentenced him to twenty years in the Department of Correction. The Defendant now appeals, arguing the following: (1) that there was insufficient evidence to convict the Defendant of second degree murder, (2) that the juvenile court erred by transferring the Defendant to be tried as an adult, (3) that the trial court erred by denying the Defendant's motion to suppress his statement, (4) that the trial court erred by allowing the State to cross-examine two character witnesses for the defense about their knowledge of the Defendant's juvenile record, and (5) that the trial court erred in sentencing the Defendant to twenty years in the Department of Correction. Concluding that the trial court erred by allowing the State to introduce evidence of the Defendant's prior juvenile record during the cross-examination of character witnesses for the Defendant, we reverse and remand for a new trial. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/sextontk.wpd Veteran's Service Officer under Tenn. Code Ann. S 58-3-111(c) Date: July 29, 2002 Opinion Number: 02-083 http://www.tba.org/tba_files/AG/2002/OP83.pdf PLEASE FORWARD THIS E-MAIL! GET A FULL-TEXT COPY OF AN OPINION! JOIN THE TENNESSEE BAR ASSOCIATION! SUBSCRIBE TO OPINION FLASH! UNSUBSCRIBE TO OPINION FLASH? ... SURELY NOT! But if you must, visit the TBALink web site at: http://www.tba.org/op-flash.mgi Home • Contact Us • PageFinder • What's New • Help |
|
© Copyright 2002 Tennessee Bar Association
|