Opinion FlashMay 25, 2004Volume 10 — Number 101 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):
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. Howard H. Vogel CHRIS BIRDWELL and wife, VIRGINIA BIRDWELL, v. DAVID PSIMER and PATTY S. PSIMER Court:TCA Attorneys: Raymond C. Conkin, Jr., Kingsport, Tennessee, for Appellants. Rick J. Bearfield and Jason W. Blackburn, Johnson City, Tennessee, for Appellee. Judge: FRANKS First Paragraph: Action for Judgment on loan was defended on grounds defendant sold note to plaintiffs. The Trial Court held agreements violated statute of frauds and plaintiff failed to prove loan. On appeal, we reverse. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/birdwellc.wpd ANNA FAYE FLOYD, ET AL. v. JOHNNY TESAR, ET AL.
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
Johnny Tesar, Sevierville, Tennessee, pro se Appellant.
Marsell Tesar, Murfreesboro, Tennessee, pro se Appellant.
Wilburn Green, Sevierville, Tennessee, pro se Appellant.
R. B. Hailey, Sevierville, Tennessee, for the Appellees, Anna Faye
Floyd, Michael Everette Floyd, David Earl Floyd, by Linda Floyd,
Mother and Natural Guardian, and Robert Crocker.
Judge: SWINEY
First Paragraph:
Anna Faye Floyd, Michael Everette Floyd, and David Earl Floyd, minor
children, by and through their mother and natural guardian Linda Floyd
("Plaintiffs"), sued Johnny Tesar, Marsell Tesar, Jobey Green, Wilburn
Green, and Martha Lee ("Defendants") to quiet title to land in Sevier
County, Tennessee. After a bench trial, the Trial Court held, inter
alia, that the minor Plaintiffs are the true owners of the land, and
that Defendants Johnny Tesar and Marsell Tesar had committed fraud
upon the Plaintiffs, knowingly clouded Plaintiffs' title, and
trespassed upon Plaintiffs' land. The Trial Court also awarded
Plaintiffs damages and attorney's fees against Defendants Johnny Tesar
and Marsell Tesar. Defendants appeal but raise no specific issues on
appeal and point to no error in the record. We affirm.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/floydannaf.wpd
WANDA MOODY v. TIMOTHY HUTCHISON, SHERIFF OF KNOX COUNTY
Court:TCA
Attorneys:
Mary Ann Stackhouse, Dean B. Farmer, and Keith L. Edmiston, Knoxville,
Tennessee, for the Appellant Timothy Hutchison, Sheriff of Knox
County.
Herbert S. Moncier, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the Appellee Wanda
Moody.
Judge: SWINEY
First Paragraph:
Knox County Commissioner Wanda Moody ("Plaintiff") made a Public
Records Act request for numerous documents in the possession of
Timothy Hutchison, the Sheriff of Knox County ("Defendant").
Defendant responded and provided some, but not all of the requested
documents. Plaintiff eventually sought to have Defendant held in
criminal contempt claiming at least fifty of his responses to the
various document requests were false. After a trial on the criminal
contempt charges, the Trial Court concluded Defendant made "at least
six" false representations which amounted to criminal contempt, and
imposed the maximum fine of $50 for each offense, for a total of $300.
Defendant appeals claiming, among other things, that the proof failed
to establish that he was guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of criminal
contempt. We affirm the judgment of the Trial Court.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/moodywanda.wpd
LEROY MOSBY, ET AL. v. MEMPHIS AREA TRANSIT AUTHORITY, ET AL. Court:TCA Attorneys: Irwin I. Cantor, Memphis, TN, for Appellants John M. Moore, Memphis, TN, for Appellees Judge: HIGHERS First Paragraph: This case arises out of a motor vehicle accident, which resulted in the death of Deceased, a fare- paying passenger of a bus. Plaintiffs, Deceased's heirs, brought a wrongful death action against the driver of the Cadillac in the bus/car collision and Defendants, the driver of the bus and the Memphis Area Transit Authority. At the close of Plaintiffs' proof, the trial court granted Defendants' motion for involuntary dismissal pursuant to Rule 41.02(2) of the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure. For the reasons stated below, we affirm the decision of the trial court. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/mosbyleroy.wpd NICKO ALFREDO SANTIAGO, ET AL. v. JOY COOPER, ET AL. Court:TCA Attorneys: Charles L. Hicks, Jason W. Pearcy, Camden, TN, for Appellant B. Duane Willis, Jeffery G. Foster, Jackson, TN, for Appellees Judge: HIGHERS First Paragraph: Plaintiff, a minor student, brought suit for damages arising from an eye injury he sustained during recess at school. The Defendants, which are both governmental entities, moved for summary judgment, arguing that they are immune from suit and that Plaintiff cannot, as a matter of law, establish the elements of his negligence claim. After conducting a hearing, the trial court granted the Defendants summary judgment on both grounds. For the following reasons, we affirm the ruling of the lower court. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCA/santiagonickoa.wpd STATE OF TENNESSEE v. MICHAEL ARMSTRONG Court:TCCA Attorneys: W. Mark Ward, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellant, Michael Armstrong. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General & Reporter; Braden H. Boucek, Assistant Attorney General; William L. Gibbons, District Attorney General; and Steve Hall, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: SMITH First Paragraph: On May 22, 2001, the defendant, Michael Armstrong, entered a plea of nolo contendere to the offense of operating a motor vehicle after having been declared a habitual motor vehicle offender and banned from driving. He was sentenced to one year in the work house and one year of probation. The defendant reserved a certified question for appeal pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 37(b)(2)(i). This question concerns the admissibility into evidence of the defendant's statement to police that he had driven to the police station to report two cars stolen from his employer. This statement was made in response to a police officer's question as to how the defendant had gotten to the station. This question was asked after the police officer had found out the defendant was an habitual motor vehicle offender whose Tennessee driver's license was revoked, but before any Miranda warnings were given to the defendant. The defendant's response to this question formed the basis of his arrest. The trial court denied the defendant's motion to suppress concluding that the defendant was not in custody at the time he answered the officer's question. We find that the record clearly indicates the defendant was not in custody at the time he admitted he had driven to the police station and that therefore no Miranda warnings were required. The judgment of the trial court is therefore AFFIRMED. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/armstrongmich.wpd STATE OF TENNESSEE v. CARY RAY DAVIS Court:TCCA Attorneys: J. Thomas Caldwell, Ripley, Tennessee, for the appellant, Cary Ray Davis. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General & Reporter; Kathy D. Aslinger, Assistant Attorney General; Elizabeth Rice, District Attorney General; and Colin Campbell, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: SMITH First Paragraph: The Tipton County Grand Jury indicted the defendant for one count of aggravated assault. After a jury trial, the defendant was found guilty of aggravated assault. He was sentenced to three years as a Range I Standard Offender. The trial court ordered the defendant to serve 180 days in incarceration and the balance of the sentence in community corrections. The defendant argues two issues in his appeal: (1) there was insufficient evidence to convict him of aggravated assault because he was acting in self-defense; and (2) the trial court erred in denying the defendant full probation. We affirm the actions of the trial court. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/daviscaryray.wpd STATE OF TENNESSEE v. CLAY JONES WITH CONCURRING OPINION Court:TCCA Attorneys: George Morton Googe, District Public Defender, Jackson, Tennessee, for the Appellant, Clay Jones. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Michael Moore, Solicitor General; Thomas E. Williams, III, Assistant Attorney General; James G. Woodall, District Attorney General; and Shaun Brown, Assistant District Attorney General, for the Appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: HAYES First Paragraph: The Appellant, Clay Jones, appeals from the judgment of the Madison County Circuit Court revoking his community corrections sentences. In May of 2001, Jones pled guilty to two counts of sale of a counterfeit controlled substance. Pursuant to a negotiated plea agreement, Jones received concurrent two-year sentences with placement in the Community Corrections Program. On October 22, 2002, a warrant was issued alleging violations of his behavioral contract. However, the warrant only listed one indictment number. Following a revocation hearing, he was found in violation of his community corrections sentences under both indictment numbers. On appeal, Jones raises the following issues for our review: (1) whether, prior to waiver of his right to counsel and subsequent inculpatory admissions at the revocation hearing, due process required the trial court to inform him that he could be resentenced to consecutive terms if his sentences were revoked; (2) whether lack of proper notice of revocation deprived him of due process; and (3) whether resentencing him to consecutive terms was proper. After review, we affirm the trial court's revocation of Jones' sentence in the case in which notice was received. However, with regard to revocation of his sentence in which no notice was received, we find that the proceedings failed to afford fundamental due process protections and reverse the trial court's order of revocation. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/jonesclay_opn.wpd CONCURRING OPINION http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/jonesclay_con.wpd MARVIN ANTHONY MATTHEWS, PRO SE v. STATE OF TENNESSEE Court:TCCA Attorneys: Marvin Anthony Matthews, pro se. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General & Reporter; Michael Markham, Assistant Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: HAYES First Paragraph: The Petitioner, Marvin Anthony Matthews, appeals the trial court's summary dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. The State has filed a motion requesting that this Court affirm the trial court's denial of relief pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals. The petition for post-conviction relief is barred by the statute of limitations. Accordingly, the State's motion is granted and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/matthewmarvina.wpd STATE OF TENNESSEE v. FRED ALLEN OWENS Court:TCCA Attorneys: Brandt Davis, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Fred Allen Owens. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Michelle R. Chapman, Assistant Attorney General; Randall E. Nichols, District Attorney General; and Leland Price, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: WELLES First Paragraph: The Defendant, Fred Allen Owens, was convicted by a jury of second degree murder. The trial court sentenced the Defendant as a Range II multiple offender to thirty-five years in the Department of Correction. In this direct appeal, the Defendant challenges several of the trial court's evidentiary rulings and also challenges the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction. We affirm the judgment of the trial court. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/owensfa.wpd EDDIE WILLIAMS, JR., PRO SE v. DAVID MILLS, WARDEN Court:TCCA Attorneys: Eddie Williams, Jr., pro se. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General & Reporter; Jennifer L. Bledsoe, Assistant Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee. Judge: WILLIAMS First Paragraph: This matter is before the Court upon the State's motion to affirm the judgment of the trial court by order pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals. The Petitioner appeals the trial court's denial of habeas corpus relief. The Petitioner fails to assert a cognizable ground for habeas corpus relief. Accordingly, the State's motion is granted and the judgment of the trial court is affirmed. http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/williamseddie.wpd 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 2004 Tennessee Bar Association
|