A Hamilton County jury convicted Defendant, Tamarion Terrell Johnson, of second degree murder and aggravated assault in the shooting death of the victim, Shawnquell Stanfield. The trial court merged the assault conviction into the murder conviction. Defendant argues on appeal that the trial court improperly instructed the jury on flight and that the evidence was insufficient to support his second degree murder conviction. We affirm the judgments of the trial court.

The Defendant, Adam Janes, appeals the trial court’s denial of his motion for a reduction of sentence pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 35. Specifically, the Defendant argues that: (1) he received the ineffective assistance of trial counsel; (2) he entered into his guilty plea unknowingly and involuntarily; (3) the assistant district attorney was prejudiced against him; (4) he was entitled to concurrent sentences; (5) he was not given the opportunity of rehabilitation; (6) his sentence was not the least severe measure necessary to achieve the purposes for which the sentence was imposed; and (7) the State failed to file a notice of intent to seek enhanced punishment. After review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

MURPHY, Circuit Judge. A state jury convicted Samuel Fields of breaking into an elderly woman’s home, slashing her throat, and stabbing a knife through her head. The police found Fields next to the woman’s body, and he confessed to killing her. At trial, the prosecution argued that Fields got into the woman’s home by unscrewing a porch window with a certain knife that was admitted into evidence; the defense countered that Fields could not have conducted this feat because he was intoxicated at the time of the crime. During deliberations, the jury used this knife to unscrew the screws on a jury-room cabinet. It found Fields guilty and sentenced him to death. Fields later alleged that the jury’s “experiment” with the knife violated the Constitution. The Kentucky Supreme Court disagreed, and a federal district court denied Fields habeas relief.

Fields renews this jury-experiment claim, among others, on appeal. For well over a century, lower courts have debated when jury experiments of this type violate state or federal law. But one court has yet to enter this debate: the U.S. Supreme Court. That fact dooms Fields’s claim in these proceedings. Under the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act (AEDPA), we may not grant habeas relief unless a state court has unreasonably applied “clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court[.]” 28 U.S.C. § 2254(d)(1). Because the Court has not identified any principles to distinguish proper from improper jury experiments, Fields cannot show that the experiment in his case violated “clearly established” law from the Supreme Court. His other claims also cannot overcome AEDPA’s standards. We thus affirm the denial of habeas relief.

The TBA’s 35th Annual Health Law Forum took place in downtown Nashville yesterday and today. Close to 300 attendees heard updates on regulatory fraud and abuse, antitrust, False Claims Act, the future of telehealth and privacy issues. The program also included a legislative update and ethics update. The keynote address was delivered by Dr. C. Buddy Creech with Vanderbilt University Medical Center, who spoke about preparing for the next pandemic. Section Chair Mark Ison with Sherrard Roe Voigt & Harbison in Nashville moderated the event, and at a luncheon today, passed the Section Cup to incoming chair Ian Hennessey, general counsel for Alliance for Multispecialty Research in Knoxville. See photos from the event.

The U.S. Supreme Court yesterday heard oral arguments in a pair of cases that test whether the U.S. Constitution's First Amendment bars government officials from blocking their critics on social media platforms. The question is whether social media activity should be deemed official action that is subject to limits on the government’s ability to restrict speech. One case involves parents in California who were blocked from the personal Twitter accounts of school board members, while another looks at a suit against a Michigan city official who blocked a state resident on Facebook. SCOTUSblog reports on the cases.

Davidson County lawyer Robert Redman Laser III was suspended from the practice of law today by the Tennessee Supreme Court after the court found that he failed to respond to the Board of Professional Responsibility about a misconduct complaint. He is precluded from accepting any new cases, and must cease representing existing clients by Dec. 1.

The law license of South Carolina lawyer Keith Lane Edmiston was reinstated to the active practice of law today. Edmiston had been placed on disability inactive status on Dec. 15, 2017. He filed for reinstatement on Feb. 7, demonstrating the disability had been removed. The Tennessee Supreme Court removed the disability status in April but maintained the inactive status until all disciplinary complaints were resolved.

Putnam County lawyer John Philip Parsons was reinstated to the practice of law today. He had been disbarred by the Tennessee Supreme Court on Oct. 13, 2017. Parsons filed a reinstatement petition on March 10 and a formal hearing was held on Sept. 7. The Board of Professional Responsibility (BPR) recommended he be reinstated. The court conditioned reinstatement on Parson’s engagement of a practice monitor who must meet with him once a month for one year to assess his caseload, timeliness of tasks, adequacy of communication with clients and accounting procedures, and provide monthly written reports to the BPR.

The law firm of Winston & Strawn has been sued in Houston federal court by an anti-affirmative action group over fellowships it offered to first year law students to help bolster diversity at the firm, Reuters reports. The suit, brought by the American Alliance for Equal Rights, is one of several filed by the group formed by conservative activist Edward Blum. Bloomberg Law reports that the firm defended its program in correspondence with the group and says it plans to continue offering the program. This article also notes the alliance threatened two other firms — Hunton Andrews & Kurth and Adams and Reese — if they do not make changes to their fellowship program criteria.

Nashville has established a new Community Review Board after the state legislators abolished civilian oversight boards, WSMV reports. Under the new law, jurisdictions may form police advisory and review entities to make recommendations for complaints against officers. In a media release, Nashville Mayor Freddie O’Connell said it was his goal to maintain a “meaningful civilian review process.” He says that since taking office, he has been “working with Metro Legal, Metro Finance, and Human Resources to ensure as smooth and complete an implementation of the option of a Civilian Review Board available under state law as possible.” Jill Fitcheard, who served as executive director of the oversight board, will serve in the same position on the new board.