GIBBONS, Circuit Judge. Roy West was convicted for his participation in a murder-for-hire conspiracy and sentenced to life in prison. After his direct appeals and 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion failed, West sought compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582. In that motion, he argued for the first time that his sentence violated Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000). He claimed that the jury instructions given at his trial did not sufficiently require the jury to find that death resulted from the conspiracy — a necessary finding for the court to impose a life sentence for the crime. The district court found that the Apprendi error and West’s rehabilitation constituted “extraordinary and compelling reasons” to reduce his sentence and granted West compassionate release after 17 years’ imprisonment. 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). On appeal, the government argues that the judgment of the district court should be reversed because it improperly used compassionate release as a vehicle for second or successive § 2255 motions. We agree and reverse.

BUSH, Circuit Judge. After police arrested Harold Smith with a loaded gun in his possession, he was charged with illegally possessing a firearm and ammunition as a felon. Leading up to trial, he had the opportunity to stipulate his status as a felon and his knowledge of the same to preclude the government from introducing evidence of any of his prior felony convictions. But he declined. So the government introduced evidence of Smith’s 11 prior felony convictions at trial, and a jury convicted him on both charges. As Smith had three prior violent felony convictions, the district court sentenced him as an armed career criminal. Smith raises two issues on appeal. First, he asks that we vacate his conviction and sentence based on the alleged unfairly prejudicial taint of evidence of his 11 prior felony convictions. We decline and affirm the district court on this issue. Smith then asks that we vacate his sentence and remand for resentencing because his North Carolina conviction for assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill and inflicting serious injury should not qualify as a predicate violent felony under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA). Because the offense requires purposeful or knowing conduct, it is categorically a violent felony, so we affirm.

In April 2018, petitioner, Adarion C. Morris, pleaded guilty in three separate cases and received an effective sentence of six years to be served on community corrections. However, after two community corrections violation warrants were filed, one in June 2018 and another in August 2018, the trial court held a hearing, revoked Petitioner’s community corrections sentence, and re-sentenced Petitioner to 48 years in the Department of Correction. This court affirmed the trial court’s revocation and sentence imposed on appeal. See State v. Adarion C. Morris, No. M2018-02034-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn. Crim. App. Dec. 5, 2019), no perm. app. filed. Petitioner subsequently filed a post-conviction petition alleging that he received ineffective assistance of counsel when entering his guilty pleas, which rendered his pleas unknowing and involuntary. He also alleged counsel was ineffective at the revocation hearing and re-sentencing for not challenging the legality of the original community corrections sentence. After a hearing, the post-conviction court concluded Petitioner’s ineffective assistance of counsel claims regarding the guilty pleas were untimely and that the ineffective assistance of counsel claim relative to the revocation and re-sentencing was without merit. Petitioner appeals, arguing that he is entitled to due process tolling of the limitations period for his claims regarding his guilty pleas. After review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

The defendant, Douglas Wayne Woods, was convicted by a Sullivan County Criminal Court jury of two counts of perjury, a Class A misdemeanor. See T.C.A. § 39-16- 702(a)(1) (2018) (subsequently amended). The trial court imposed an effective sentence of 11 months and 29 days on probation. On appeal, the defendant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions. We affirm the judgments of the trial court.

A decedent’s estate sued his girlfriend for the proceeds of his life insurance policy, items from his home that were missing or damaged, and money withdrawn from his credit union account. The trial court found for the estate on the basis of fraud, conversion and undue influence. The girlfriend appealed. We affirm in part, reverse in part, vacate in part and remand.

After a jury trial, the defendant, Jerry Rommell Gray, was convicted of felony murder, attempted especially aggravated robbery and attempted aggravated robbery. The defendant received a total effective sentence of life plus 15 years. In this delayed appeal, the defendant argues that the trial court erred by ordering that additional fingerprints could be taken from the defendant on the first day of trial and allowing an expert to testify regarding the conclusions of a non-testifying expert. Upon review, we respectfully affirm the judgments of the trial court.

This appeal concerns a claim of retaliatory discharge. Heather Smith (“Smith”), then an at-will employee of BlueCross BlueShield of Tennessee Inc. (“BlueCross”), declined to take a Covid-19 vaccine. Smith emailed members of the Tennessee General Assembly expressing her concerns and grievances about vaccine mandates. BlueCross fired Smith after it found out about her emails. Smith sued BlueCross for common law retaliatory discharge in the Chancery Court for Hamilton County (“the Trial Court”). For its part, BlueCross filed a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. After a hearing, the Trial Court granted BlueCross’s motion to dismiss. Smith appeals. We hold that Article I, Section 23 of the Tennessee Constitution, which guarantees the right of citizens to petition the government, is a clear and unambiguous statement of public policy representing an exception to the doctrine of employment-at-will. Smith has alleged enough at this stage to withstand BlueCross’s motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. We reverse the Trial Court and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Gov. Bill Lee recently signed a bill that gives dozens of people a chance to be removed from the Tennessee Sex Offender Registry due to a decades-old law regarding HIV exposure. ABC24 in Memphis reports that the bill amends the current law — where potentially exposing someone to HIV was a felony and required people to register as sex offenders — removing the sex offender registry requirement for people convicted of criminal exposure. People will qualify for removal if they do not have any other sex offenses on their record, although there is no clear timeline for how quickly names will be removed.

The Tennessee Supreme Court yesterday adopted Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 55 – Use of Technology for Court Proceedings. The rule allows the use of teleconferencing, video conferencing and other technology to conduct court proceedings remotely at the discretion of the trial or appellate court. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the court encouraged the use of technology to facilitate remote proceedings, and has since found that parties and courts benefit from remote proceedings, making the pandemic exception a permanent option.

Holland & Knight has announced that Robert Crammig will assume the newly created senior leadership roles of chair and CEO after longtime managing partner Steven Sonberg steps down. A press release from the firm states that the leadership change follows a period of transformational growth at Holland & Knight that has included the firm's combinations with Nashville-based Waller Lansden Dortch & Davis in March 2023, and Texas-based Thompson & Knight in August 2021.