The Defendant, Brian Keith Medley, was found guilty of sexual battery and domestic assault. He was sentenced to the statutory maximum of four years as a Range II, multiple offender. On appeal, he argues that the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions and that the maximum sentence was excessive. We respectfully affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Question:

Assuming that a director of schools has been duly found to be in violation of subsection (c) of Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-2-301, does Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-2-301(c) require that the director be dismissed from the director’s position?

Opinion:

Yes, the word “shall” in subsection (c) of Tenn. Code Ann. § 49-2-301 should be regarded as mandatory so that if a director of schools has been duly found to be in violation of subsection (c) the school board has no discretion as to the consequences of the violation and is required to dismiss that director.

Question:

Is a private prison company that contracts with a state, county, or municipal law enforcement or correctional agency to operate a prison or jail in Tennessee subject to the reporting and public records requirements of Tenn. Code Ann. § 38-10-102?

Opinion:

Yes, a private prison company that has contracted with a state, county, or municipal law enforcement or correctional agency to operate a prison or jail in Tennessee is subject to the reporting and public records requirements of Tenn. Code Ann. § 38-10-102.

The Petitioner, Marcus Thomas, appeals from the Knox County Criminal Court’s denial of post-conviction relief from his guilty-pleaded conviction to attempted first degree murder. On appeal, the Petitioner contends that the post-conviction court erred by denying relief on his claims alleging that he received the ineffective assistance of trial counsel and that his guilty plea was involuntary and unknowing. We affirm the judgment of the post-conviction.

The Defendant, Katherine E. Pilley, pleaded guilty to possession of methamphetamine, a Class A misdemeanor. See T.C.A. § 39-17-418(a), (c)(1) (2018) (subsequently amended) (simple possession of methamphetamine). The trial court sentenced the Defendant to eleven months, twenty-nine days suspended to probation after thirty days in confinement. On appeal, the Defendant presents a certified question of law, challenging the trial court’s denial of a motion to suppress evidence obtained during the warrantless search of the Defendant’s car. Because the certified question is overly broad as it fails to identify the scope and limits of the legal issue reserved, we conclude that we are without jurisdiction to consider this appeal. The appeal is dismissed.

The petitioner, Keith Trammell, appeals the denial of his post-conviction petition, arguing he received the ineffective assistance of counsel on direct appeal. Following our review, we affirm the post-conviction court’s denial of the petition.

As relevant to this appeal, the Defendant, David Ray Duncan, was convicted by a jury of the offense of unlawfully possessing a controlled substance while present in a penal institution. On appeal, the Defendant challenges the legal sufficiency of the evidence supporting his conviction. He also argues that the trial court should have excluded evidence produced after the deadline established by the court’s scheduling order, and he challenges the propriety of his effective twelve-year sentence. We affirm the Defendant’s conviction, but we respectfully remand the case for resentencing in accordance with Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-11-211.

A father appeals the termination of his parental rights to two children. The trial court concluded that the maternal aunt and uncle proved two statutory grounds for termination by clear and convincing evidence. The court also concluded that there was clear and convincing evidence that termination was in the children’s best interest. After a thorough review, we agree and affirm.

Ricky Hunter, Defendant, was indicted for one count of first degree murder and one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm. After a jury trial, Defendant was convicted of the lesser included offense of second degree murder and being a felon in possession of a firearm. He was sentenced to a total effective sentence of 33 years. The trial court denied a motion for new trial. After this Court waived the timely filing of the notice of appeal, this appeal ensued. On appeal, Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence sustaining the second degree murder conviction. We find the evidence sufficient and affirm the convictions.

Governmental entities generally are immune from suit. But the Governmental Tort Liability Act removes immunity for certain injuries caused by the negligent acts of an employee. In this case, we consider whether the term “negligent” in the Act’s removal provision is limited to ordinary negligence or instead also encompasses gross negligence or recklessness. We hold that the Act removes immunity only for ordinary negligence. Because the Court of Appeals held to the contrary, we reverse the decision below and remand for further proceedings.