Articles

All Content


4,049 Posts found
Previous • Page 271 of 405 • Next
Posted by: Karen Belcher on Sep 3, 2020

CLAY, Circuit Judge. Plaintiffs, ten unidentified minors, appeal the district court’s order dismissing two Defendants, Senator Elizabeth Warren and Representative Debra Haaland, from this defamation suit. Plaintiffs claim that Senator Warren and Representative Haaland committed libel against them by issuing a series of tweets in response to a widely publicized incident on the National Mall in which Plaintiffs were involved. The district court found that Plaintiffs’ defamation claims were barred by sovereign immunity. For the reasons provided in this opinion, we AFFIRM the district court’s order.

Posted by: Karen Belcher on Sep 3, 2020

ROGERS, Circuit Judge. Defendants Angel Cordero and Eduardo Velasquez were convicted by a jury of conspiring to commit murder for hire and conspiring to distribute one kilogram of cocaine. On appeal, defendants argue that their convictions were not supported by sufficient evidence and challenge the admission of other-acts evidence under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b). Defendants also raise sentencing claims. Defendants’ challenges to their convictions fail because the record demonstrates a sufficient factual basis for their guilt on the charged offenses. Also, the district court correctly admitted the challenged bad-act evidence, as that evidence served permissible purposes under Rule 404(b) and was probative of contested issues in the case. Finally, the district court properly applied the Sentencing Guidelines to calculate Cordero’s base offense level. However, as the Government concedes, a limited remand is required with respect to Velasquez, who was incorrectly sentenced as a career offender.

Posted by: Karen Belcher on Sep 3, 2020

The defendant, Terry William Smith, appeals his 2019 Hamilton County Criminal Court jury convictions of speeding, failure to obey a traffic control signal, reckless endangerment, evading arrest, violating the open container law, and driving under the influence, arguing that the evidence was insufficient to support some of his convictions and that the trial court erred by ordering a sentence of split confinement. We affirm the defendant’s convictions, the imposition of a two-year effective sentence, and the trial court’s decision to order split confinement. Because the confinement term of the split confinement sentence exceeds that allowed under the terms of Code section 40-35-501(a)(3), we modify the term of confinement and remand the case for the entry of corrected judgment forms reflecting the modified sentence and the proper place of confinement.

Posted by: Karen Belcher on Sep 3, 2020

Defendant, Tareaun Griffin, is appealing the trial court’s denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence filed pursuant to Rule of Criminal Procedure Rule 36.1 The State has filed a motion asking this Court to affirm pursuant to Court of Criminal Appeals Rule 20. Said motion is hereby granted.

Posted by: Karen Belcher on Sep 3, 2020

Trista S. (“Mother”) appeals the termination of her parental rights on the grounds of (1) persistence of conditions; (2) failure to manifest a willingness and ability to assume custody of the child; and (3) mental incompetence. Mother also appeals the trial court’s finding that termination of her parental rights is in the best interests of the child. Because the record contains clear and convincing evidence supporting the grounds for termination and the best interests determination, we affirm.

Posted by: Karen Belcher on Sep 2, 2020

This is the second interlocutory appeal of this case. In the first appeal, we vacated the trial court’s order denying the employer’s motion for summary judgment and remanded the case for the trial court to consider the threshold issue of subject matter jurisdiction. In this appeal, the employer asserts the trial court erred in concluding it could exercise subject matter jurisdiction over the employee’s mental injury claim. It further contends the trial court erred in concluding there were genuine issues of material fact precluding summary judgment as to the timeliness of the employee’s petition for benefits. We conclude the trial court erred in exercising subject matter jurisdiction over this claim, and we reverse the trial court’s expedited hearing order and remand the case to the trial court for entry of an order of dismissal.

Posted by: Karen Belcher on Sep 2, 2020

The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to compel the production of the audio recordings from his post-conviction proceeding pursuant to the Tennessee Public Records Act. The trial court dismissed the petition, finding that the recordings were exempt from disclosure. The petitioner appeals. We affirm.

Posted by: Karen Belcher on Sep 2, 2020

David Charles Gambrell, Defendant, was indicted for five counts of statutory rape by an authority figure and two counts of sexual battery by an authority figure based on allegations made by his fifteen-year-old stepdaughter. Defendant pled guilty to amended charges of four counts of aggravated statutory rape with the trial court to determine the length and manner of service of the sentence. The remaining counts were nolle prossed. After a sentencing hearing, the trial court denied Defendant’s request for judicial diversion, ordering him to serve four years in incarceration for each conviction, with the sentences to be served consecutively, for a total effective sentence of sixteen years. Defendant appeals his sentences. After a review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Posted by: Karen Belcher on Sep 2, 2020

Petitioner, Christopher M. Ferrell, appeals from the denial of his petition for post- conviction relief from his 2015 conviction for second degree murder. Petitioner contends that he received the ineffective assistance of counsel at trial and on direct appeal. Following our review of the record, we affirm the denial of the petition.

Posted by: Karen Belcher on Sep 2, 2020

As part of a guilty plea to driving under the influence (“DUI”), Defendant, Janice A. Campbell, reserved a certified question for appeal pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 37(b)(2)(A). She asks this Court to determine whether her arrest for DUI in a private home without a warrant violated Tennessee Code Annotated section 40- 7-103 when Defendant was arrested without being seen by an officer operating the vehicle in question and no vehicle accident was involved. After a review, we determine that the certified question is not dispositive. Consequently, the appeal is dismissed.


Previous • Page 271 of 405 • Next