The defendant, Blake Gregg, appeals from his Sullivan County Criminal Court guiltypleaded convictions in multiple case numbers of possession of methamphetamine, two counts of possession with intent to sell .5 grams or more of methamphetamine, possession of oxycodone, possession of buprenorphine, possession of clonazepam, introduction of contraband into a penal institution, domestic assault, aggravated domestic assault, evading arrest, driving under the influence (“DUI”), two counts of driving on a suspended license, one count of second or subsequent offense of driving on a suspended license, driving while in possession of methamphetamine, theft of property valued at $1,000 or more but less than $2,500, four counts of possession of drug paraphernalia, running a stop sign, violating the vehicle light law, and two counts of violating the financial responsibility law. In this appeal, the defendant asserts that the trial court erred by ordering that he serve the 10-year sentence imposed in case number S68680 in confinement. Discerning no error, we affirm.

A pro se defendant appeals a judgment entered against him on a promissory note. Because the defendant failed to file a transcript or statement of evidence, we presume that the trial court’s findings are supported by the evidence. In light of that presumption, we affirm the judgment.

This is a health care liability case. The trial court granted Appellee’s motion for summary judgment because, inter alia, Appellant failed to provide Appellee with the proper pre-suit notice under Tennessee Code Annotated section 29-26-121(a)(1). Finding no error, we affirm.

Question: 

Would the relocation of the Knox County Board of Education’s administrative offices to the Tennessee Valley Authority (“TVA” ) East Tower, a federally-controlled building, pursuant to a Term Easement between Knox County and TVA violate any applicable provision of state law, including Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-6-2004(a), Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-2-203(a)(2), or any other Tennessee law requiring that a county board of education have custody and control of all public school property?

Opinion: 

A county school board’s duty to “[m]anage and control all public schools” under Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-2-203(a)(2) does not categorically prevent the Knox County Board of Education (“Board”) from relocating its administrative offices to the TVA East Tower. Similarly, the requirement that the Board have the custody of all county school property under Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-6-2004(a) does not foreclose the Board from relocating its administrative offices to the TVA East Tower. As long as the lease agreement for the office space does not impinge on the Board’s duty to manage and control the public schools under its jurisdiction and does not impinge on the Board’s authority to have the county’s school property in its charge, locating the Board’s administrative offices in the TVA East Tower would not be prohibited by these statutory provisions.

McKEAGUE, Circuit Judge. Richard Paulus was convicted of healthcare fraud and making false statements relating to healthcare matters. Before sentencing, Paulus learned that the government withheld evidence from him on the district court’s orders. On appeal he argues that this withholding violated his due process rights under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963). We agree. Therefore, we VACATE Paulus’s conviction and REMAND for further proceedings.

PER CURIAM. Nathaniel Ogle works for the Ohio Department of Taxation. He is not a member of the Ohio Civil Service Employees Association, the union that represents the Department’s employees in collective bargaining with the State of Ohio. Under state law, the union may require non-members like Ogle to pay “fair share” fees to defray the cost of collective-bargaining activities. Ohio Rev. Code Ann. § 4117.09(C).

THAPAR, Circuit Judge. This case comes down to a matter of perspective. After a car chase, law enforcement used a police dog to remove a driver from his vehicle. From the driver’s perspective, this was an unprovoked attack on a cooperating suspect. From the officer’s perspective, it was the best way to gain control of the situation. The district court granted the officer qualified immunity. Because existing law did not clearly establish that the officer’s perspective was unreasonable, we affirm.

The employee appeals from the trial court’s denial of workers’ compensation benefits. The employee asserted that a slip and fall suffered at work aggravated pre-existing degenerative conditions in his left shoulder and neck, causing injuries that are compensable under Tennessee’s workers’ compensation laws. After a trial, the trial court reviewed the testimony at length and held that the employee had failed to establish a compensable injury. The employee’s appeal has been referred to this Special Workers’ Compensation Appeals Panel for oral argument and a report of findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 51. Discerning no error, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Defendant, George Ronald Perez, was indicted by the Montgomery County Grand Jury for possession with intent to sell or deliver 0.5 ounce or more of marijuana, simple possession of cocaine, simple possession of methamphetamine, possession of drug paraphernalia, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a dangerous felony. Defendant entered open guilty pleas to felony possession with intent to sell or deliver 0.5 ounce or more of marijuana, simple possession of cocaine, simple possession of methamphetamine, and possession of drug paraphernalia. A bench trial was conducted on the charge of possession of a firearm during the commission of a dangerous felony, and Defendant was found guilty. The trial court sentenced Defendant to consecutive sentences of one year for possession with intent to sell 0.5 ounce or more of marijuana and three years for possession of a firearm during the commission of a dangerous felony. The trial court sentenced Defendant to 11 months and 29 days for each of his remaining convictions and ordered those sentences to run concurrently with his three-year sentence. Defendant’s sole issue on appeal is whether the evidence was sufficient to support his conviction for possession of a firearm during the commission of a dangerous felony. Having reviewed the entire record, we conclude that the evidence was sufficient. Accordingly, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

The defendant, Aaron Frank Britton, appeals his Knox County Criminal Court guiltypleaded conviction of aggravated assault, arguing that the trial court erred by imposing a fully incarcerative sentence. Discerning no error, we affirm.