The Defendant, Tyrone L. Watts, appeals his conviction for attempted terrorism. He challenges the sufficiency of the evidence and the trial court?s failure to provide complete jury instructions defining what would constitute an “imminent threat of death or serious bodily injury.” Following our review, we conclude that the evidence is insufficient to support the Defendant?s conviction for attempted terrorism. Accordingly, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand for sentencing on the Defendant?s alternative conviction for disorderly conduct in count one.

The Defendant, Adam Wayne Robinson, was convicted by a jury of three counts of aggravated sexual battery. The Defendant raises three issues on appeal: prosecutorial misconduct during closing argument, sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the convictions, and cumulative error. During closing argument, the prosecutor improperly commented upon the Defendant’s right not to testify and engaged in a persistent pattern of other improper prosecutorial argument.

The defendant, Stanley Bernard Gibson, was charged with the possession of but convicted of facilitation of possession of .5 grams or more of cocaine with intent to deliver within 1000 feet of a drug-free school zone and sentenced, as a Range II, multiple offender, to twelve years at 100%. On appeal, he argues that the evidence is insufficient to support the verdict and that the court erred in ordering that he serve his sentence at 100%. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The petitioner, Byron Becton, appeals the denial of post-conviction relief from his 2011 Shelby County Criminal Court jury convictions of aggravated rape, claiming that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel at trial. Discerning no error, we affirm.

This post-divorce appeal concerns the mother?s notice of intent to relocate to Pennsylvania with the parties? minor children. The father responded by filing a petition in opposition to the requested relocation. Following a hearing, the trial court granted the father?s petition. The mother appeals. We reverse the decision of the trial court.

This is a post-divorce action. The trial court denied Wife?s motion to continue, found that she breached the parties? marital dissolution agreement, and credited Husband for amounts he paid for necessaries when calculating Husband?s child support arrearage. Wife appeals. We affirm.

The Defendant, Poncho Juan Delgado, appeals as of right his jury conviction for first degree premeditated murder. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-202. On appeal, the Defendant contends that the State failed to prove the element of premeditation. The State responds that ample evidence of premeditation was presented. Following our review, we conclude that the evidence was sufficient to establish premeditation, and we therefore affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Hal H. Lane appeals the May 20, 2014 judgment of the Chancery Court for Greene County (“the Trial Court”) finding and holding, inter alia, that Joseph J. Holt was the person who took care of Georgia Myers Smelcer (“Deceased”) until her death and, therefore, inherited real property known as the Hartshaw Addition pursuant to the Last Will and Testament of Georgia Myers Smelcer. We find and hold that the evidence does not preponderate against the Trial Court’s findings, and we affirm.

Hal H. Lane appeals the May 20, 2014 Declaratory Judgment of the Chancery Court for Greene County (“the Trial Court”). We find and hold that Mr. Lane is not an aggreived party to this judgment and, therefore, lacks standing to appeal the judgment. We, therefore, affirm.