In 2019, a Shelby County jury convicted the Petitioner, Victor Wise, of two counts of aggravated robbery, one count of attempted aggravated robbery, and two counts of aggravated assault. The trial court sentenced him to forty-four years of incarceration. The Petitioner appealed his convictions to this court, and we affirmed the convictions but concluded that the trial court erred by imposing consecutive sentences. This court modified the Petitioner’s total effective sentence to twelve years. State v. Wise, No. W2018-01343- CCA-R3-CD, 2019 WL 4492910, at *1 (Tenn. Crim. App. Sept. 18, 2019), no perm. app. filed. Subsequently, the Petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief, claiming that he received the ineffective assistance of counsel, which the post-conviction court denied after a hearing. After review, we affirm the post-conviction court’s judgment.

Defendant, Christopher A. Williams, while on parole under a sentence from the Sullivan County Criminal Court, was convicted in federal court for conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute 28 grams or more of cocaine base. The State filed a detainer based on Defendant's violation of parole. Defendant filed a pro se "Motion to Terminate Parole as Unsatisfactorily Completed/Alternatively Revoke Parole and Impose Sentence in Absentia to Run Concurrent with Federal Supervise Release," which the trial court denied, finding that the Interstate Agreement on Detainers ("IAD") "does not apply to probation violations." Defendant filed a pro se motion to reconsider, asserting that he was denied a due process hearing on his parole revocation. The trial court denied the motion, and Defendant appeals. We dismiss Defendant's appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

The Defendant, Alain Benitez, appeals the Smith County Criminal Court’s imposition of consecutive sentencing for his two convictions of first degree felony murder. Upon review, we conclude that we must dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

This appeal arises from a petition filed by a beneficiary of a trust seeking an accounting and removal of the trustee. The trustee asserted the affirmative defense that the beneficiary violated the no-contest clause in the settlor’s trust. The trustee served the beneficiary with requests for admissions, to which the beneficiary responded with objections to the majority of the requests. After the trial court granted his motion for the requests for admissions to be admitted, the trustee filed a motion for partial summary judgment based on the nocontest clauses in the trust and will of the settlor. The trial court granted the motion and dismissed the beneficiary’s petition with prejudice. The beneficiary appealed. We reverse and remand for further proceedings.

In this breach of implied warranty of good workmanship and materials case, the trial court awarded Appellee $77,494.36 in damages. Although the parties agree that the proper measure of damages is the cost to repair the defects, the parties dispute the method of repair and its cost. In determining Appellee’s damages, the trial court relied on testimony from Appellee’s expert contractor. Discerning no error, we affirm the trial court’s order. The parties’ respective requests for appellate attorney’s fees are denied.

The employee filed an interlocutory request for medical treatment she claims is needed due to repeated exposures to cleaning supplies used in the course and scope of her employment. The employer denied the claim, asserting there is no evidence that the employee’s alleged pulmonary conditions arose primarily from or were aggravated by workplace exposures to cleaning chemicals. Following an expedited hearing, the trial court determined that the employee had not come forward with sufficient evidence indicating a likelihood of prevailing at trial on the issue of medical causation, and the employee has appealed. Upon careful consideration of the record and arguments of counsel, we affirm the trial court’s order and remand the case.

For the week of October 9, 2023 - October 13, 2023

THAPAR, Circuit Judge. Marlon Lundy pulled out a 9-millimeter pistol, chambered a round, and pointed the gun at Alyssa Kirk, the mother of his children. Minutes later, Kirk told the police what happened. An officer recorded her statement on his bodycam, and the government played the recording at Lundy’s trial. On appeal, Lundy argues the district court shouldn’t have let the jury hear Kirk’s recorded statement. We disagree and affirm.

A Decatur County Jury found Dustin Len Lovelace, Defendant, guilty of facilitation of aggravated robbery. Defendant claims that the evidence was insufficient to support the conviction. After a thorough review of the record and applicable law, we affirm the judgment.

The Appellant, Taylor Jenkins Littrell, appeals the Carroll County Circuit Court’s order revoking his probation and ordering him to serve the remainder of his four-year sentence in confinement. The Appellant alleges that the trial court abused its discretion by: (1) admitting a blood alcohol report in violation of his confrontation rights; and (2) ordering him to serve the remainder of his sentence in confinement. Finding no reversible error, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.