STATE OF TENNESSEE v. WILLIAM YATES CRAMER
Court:TCCA
Attorneys:
Jim W. Horner, District Public Defender, and Patrick R. McGill (on
appeal) and James E. Lanier (at trial), Assistant Public Defenders,
for the appellant, William Yates Cramer.
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Benjamin A. Ball,
Assistant Attorney General; C. Phillip Bivens, District Attorney
General; and Karen Waddell Burns, Assistant District Attorney General,
for the appellee, State of Tennessee.
Judge: TIPTON
First Paragraph:
The defendant, William Yates Cramer, was convicted by a Lake County
Circuit Court jury of driving under the influence of an intoxicant
(DUI), second offense, a Class A misdemeanor. The trial court imposed
a sentence of eleven months, twenty-nine days, with probation after
ninety days in jail and ordered the defendant to pay a fine of
$600.00. On appeal, the defendant contends that (1) the evidence is
insufficient to support his conviction, (2) the trial court erred by
allowing the state to use his prior conviction for aggravated assault
to impeach his testimony, and (3) his sentence of confinement violates
Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004). We affirm
the judgment of the trial court.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/2005/cramerw72805.pdf
STATE OF TENNESSEE V. BURN HARRIS DOCKERY, JR.
Court:TCCA
Attorneys:
Keith E. Haas, Newport, Tennessee, for the appellant, Burn Harris
Dockery, Jr.
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Renee W. Turner,
Assistant Attorney General; Al C. Schmutzer, Jr., District Attorney
General; and James B. Dunn, Assistant District Attorney General, for
the appellee, State of Tennessee.
Judge: WEDEMEYER
First Paragraph:
A jury convicted the Defendant, Burn Harris Dockery, Jr., of reckless
aggravated assault, a class D felony. The trial court sentenced the
Defendant to three years, as a Range I standard offender, and it
ordered that the Defendant serve sixty days in the county jail and the
additional two years and ten months on probation. On appeal, the
Defendant contends that: (1) the evidence is insufficient to sustain
his conviction; and (2) the trial court improperly sentenced him.
Finding no error in the judgment of the trial court, we affirm the
Defendant's conviction and sentence.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/2005/dockeryb72805.pdf
CLARENCE CARNELL GASTON v. STATE OF TENNESSEE
CORRECTED OPINION (ORIGINALLY ISSUED 6-22-2005)
Court:TCCA
Attorneys:
Danny H. Goodman, Jr., Tiptonville, Tennessee, for the Appellant,
Clarence Carnell Gaston.
Paul G.Summers, Attorney General & Reporter; J. Ross Dyer, Assistant
Attorney General; Thomas A. Thomas, District Attorney General; and
James T. Cannon, Assistant District Attorney General, for the
Appellee, State of Tennessee.
Judge: WITT
First Paragraph:
The petitioner, Clarence Carnell Gaston, appeals the Obion County
Circuit Court's dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief,
in which he challenged his 2001 convictions of first degree felony
murder, second degree murder, and conspiracy to commit second degree
murder. See State v. Clarence Carnell Gaston, No.
W2001-02046-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App., Jackson, Feb. 7, 2003)
(affirming the petitioner's convictions and sentences), perm. app.
denied (Tenn. 2003). After appointing counsel, the post-conviction
court conducted a hearing on May 24, 2004. Following the hearing, the
court denied post-conviction relief. We affirm the post-conviction
court's judgment.
CORRECTED OPINION
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/2005/gastonc72805.pdf
KEUNTRAY HENSON v. STATE OF TENNESSEE
Court:TCCA
Attorneys:
Paul Guibao, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellant, Keuntray Henson.
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; David E. Coenen,
Assistant Attorney General; William L. Gibbons, District Attorney
General; and Dean DeCandia, Assistant District Attorney General, for
the appellee, State of Tennessee.
Judge: WILLIAMS
First Paragraph:
The petitioner challenges the denial of his post-conviction petition,
in which he alleged ineffective assistance of counsel. Upon review, we
conclude that the evidence on appeal does not preponderate against the
post-conviction court's findings that: (1) counsel adequately informed
the petitioner regarding the filing of a motion to suppress; and (2)
no hearing was necessary on the motion because the petitioner opted to
plead guilty. Therefore, we affirm the denial of post-conviction
relief.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/2005/hensonk72805.pdf
DAVID JOHNSON v. STATE OF TENNESSEE
Court:TCCA
Attorneys:
Charles W. Gilchrist, Jr., for the appellant, David Johnson.
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Renee W. Turner,
Assistant Attorney General; William L. Gibbons, District Attorney
General; and Douglas G. Gilbert, Assistant District Attorney General,
for the appellee, State of Tennessee.
Judge: WILLIAMS
First Paragraph:
The petitioner appeals the denial of post-conviction relief.
Specifically, he contends that trial counsel was ineffective in (1)
failing to discover the true identity of the State's primary witness
at an earlier date; and (2) failing to adequately meet with him in
preparation for trial. Upon review, we conclude that the petitioner
has failed to meet his burden with respect to both claims; therefore,
we affirm the post-conviction court's denial of relief.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/2005/johnsond72805.pdf
STATE OF TENNESSEE v. BOBBY JOE LESTER
WITH DISSENTING OPINION
Court:TCCA
Attorneys:
Kamilah E. Turner, Memphis, Tennessee, Attorney for the Appellant,
Bobby Joe Lester.
Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Michael Moore,
Solicitor General; David E. Coenen, Assistant Attorney General;
William L. Gibbons, District Attorney General; Reginald Henderson and
Paul Hagerman, Assistant District Attorneys General, for the Appellee,
State of Tennessee.
Judge: WILLIAMS
First Paragraph:
The Appellant, Bobby Joe Lester, was convicted of attempted first
degree murder, especially aggravated kidnapping, and coercion of a
witness. As a result of these convictions, Lester received an
effective eighty-five year sentence. On appeal, Lester argues that:
(1) the evidence was not sufficient to support the verdicts; (2) the
trial court erred in failing to dismiss a juror; and (3) consecutive
sentencing was improper. After a review of the record, we conclude
that the proof is sufficient to support Lester's convictions on all
counts. Moreover, we conclude issues (2) and (3) are without merit.
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/2005/lesterb72805.pdf
DISSENTING OPINION
http://www.tba.org/tba_files/TCCA/2005/lesterb_dis72805.pdf
|
