Ronald P. Ellis, Petitioner, sought post-conviction relief based on ineffective assistance of counsel after this Court affirmed his first degree murder conviction. State v. Ellis, No. W2017-01035-CCA-R3-CD, 2018 WL 4584124, at *1 (Tenn. Crim. App. Sept. 21, 2018). The post-conviction court denied relief. Petitioner appealed, arguing that trial counsel was ineffective for failing to include proof in the motion to suppress his statement to authorities about whether Petitioner was brought before a judge or magistrate before making his statement and whether Petitioner’s cognitive abilities prevented him from adequately waiving his rights. Because the evidence does not preponderate against the post-conviction court’s findings and conclusions, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

The Defendant, Alexander Ruben Carino, filed a motion to correct an illegal sentence pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 36.1. He alleged that his consecutive sentences were illegal because the trial court made no findings that consecutive sentences were appropriate. The trial court denied the motion after finding that the sentences were imposed pursuant to the Defendant’s valid plea agreement. On our review, we respectfully affirm the judgment of the trial court.

This is a termination of parental rights case. The trial court terminated Mother’s and Father’s parental rights on the ground of severe child abuse, and on its finding that termination was in the child’s best interest. The trial court also terminated Father’s rights on the additional ground that he was sentenced to incarceration for more than ten years when the child was under eight years of age. Mother and Father appeal. Discerning no error, we affirm.

This appeal concerns a claim for declaratory judgment and counterclaims for intentional misrepresentation and breach of contract arising from a series of agreements related to the development of a hotel and conference center in Cookeville, Tennessee. The developed property was to be owned by a limited liability company, and the plaintiffs sought a declaration that they had a right to buy the defendants’ interest in that company pursuant to an option in the operating agreement, which was to become effective upon a determination that the hotel project could not be completed with two identified, adjoining pieces of property. For their part, the defendants sought awards of compensatory and punitive damages based on allegations that the plaintiffs misrepresented their ability and intent to assist with financing and development tasks and then failed to perform those tasks as required by the parties’ development agreement. After the defendants filed their answer and counter-complaint, the plaintiffs moved for judgment on the pleadings based, in principal part, on the “undisputed” fact that the real estate purchase agreement for one of the two development properties had terminated. The plaintiffs also moved to dismiss the defendants’ intentional misrepresentation counterclaim for failure to state the allegations of fraud with particularity. But after the motions were filed and before they were heard, the defendants filed an amended answer with leave of the court in which they denied that the real estate purchase agreement had been properly terminated and asserted more particularized facts in support of their misrepresentation counterclaim. Nonetheless, the trial court granted the plaintiffs’ motions, declared that the real estate purchase agreement had been terminated, and dismissed the misrepresentation counterclaim. The plaintiffs then filed a motion to dismiss or for summary judgment on the remaining counterclaim for breach of contract, along with a motion for judicial notice of several public records. The trial court granted the motion under Rule 12.02 and, in the alternative, Rule 56. The defendants appeal. We vacate the trial court’s ruling that the plaintiffs were entitled to judgment on the pleadings because the defendants denied that the real estate purchase agreement had been properly terminated. But we affirm the dismissal of the misrepresentation counterclaim because the defendants failed to allege facts to establish the elements of their claim. We also affirm the trial court’s denial of the motion to continue because the record shows that the defendants were dilatory in prosecuting their contract claim. But we disagree with the court’s decision to take judicial notice of two newspaper articles, and we vacate the trial court’s ruling that the plaintiffs were entitled to dismissal of the contract counterclaim under Rule 12.02 and Rule 56. Thus, the decision of the trial court is vacated in part and affirmed in part, and this matter is remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Make plans now to gather with colleagues at the Olsen Law Firm in Chattanooga on Feb. 1 to join the TBA's Tax Law Forum livestream. This year's program, in person in Knoxville and also livestreaming in Nashville, will focus on the tax implications of the National Collegiate Athletic Association's (NCAA) new policy on name, image and likeness (NIL) activities. E. Michael Brezina, a Knoxville attorney and law professor who also co-founded Next Level Athletics and Varsity Sports Group, will lead this fascinating discussion.

Tennessee House members looking into the feasibility of rejecting federal education funding want a comprehensive study of food waste in school cafeterias under federally funded child nutrition programs, reports the Tennessean in a story originally published by Chalkbeat. Members are evaluating recommendations outlined in a 13-page report submitted Jan. 19 by the House members of the Joint Legislative Panel on Forgoing Federal Education Funding. The report recommends additional oversight of requirements that accompany federal funds, review of new federal rules and directives, and review of federal requirements for student testing. The report was submitted nearly two weeks after Senate members of the joint panel issued their own report, citing disagreements with House colleagues about findings and recommendations.

Tennessee attorney Frank Douglas Newman died Jan. 21 at 91. Newman was born in Coral Gables, Florida, and attended the University of Florida, receiving his law degree in 1957. After serving as a captain in U.S. Army Special Forces in Vietnam, Newman practiced law in Jacksonville and DeLand, later becoming a partner in a Miami law firm, where he spent most of his law career. In 2002, Newman relocated to Tennessee, opening a law office in downtown Elizabethton. He was involved with the Elizabethton Kiwanis Club and in 2019, was presented the East Tennessee Foundation Citizen of the Year Award. Memorial donations may be made to the Boys & Girls Club of Elizabethton/Carter County, 104 Hudson Dr., Elizabethton, TN 37643. The family says it will hold a celebration of life at a future date.

Frank Buck, a former state representative, died yesterday at 80. Buck was born in 1943 in Trousdale County and graduated from Tennessee Technological University before receiving a law degree from the University of Tennessee College of Law. He first joined the law office of McAllen Foutch and later formed his own practice, Buck & Buck Attorneys, with his wife Lena. In 1972, Buck successfully ran for the General Assembly and represented District 40 for 36 years, retiring in 2005. While in the House, Buck served as chair of the House Judiciary and Conservation and Environment committees and vice chair of the Transportation Committee. The Tennessean has this in-depth look at his time in office. Buck was named Tennessean of the Year in 2005 and served four years as chair of the Tennessee Judicial Council. Visitation is scheduled at Love Cantrell Funeral Home, 100 East Church St., Smithville 37166 on Jan. 27 from 3-7 p.m. and on Jan. 28 from 11a.m.- 2p.m. CST. A celebration of life will follow the visitation on Jan. 28.

The Tennessee Registry of Election Finance has asked the state attorney general’s office to investigate two Constitutional Republican groups to determine if they should register as political action committees (PACs). The registry took the action Tuesday following a complaint that the groups — Sumner County Constitutional Republicans and Tennessee Constitutional Republicans — should register. The groups deny they are PACs, saying they are private social clubs that do not provide financial support to candidates, though they have endorsed candidates. They also say the complaint lacks substance and appears to be politically motivated. Tennessee Lookout reports on the developments.

The American Bar Association (ABA) on Monday hosted “The Impact of Deepfakes on the Justice System,” a program covering topics such as deepfake regulation, authentication and the potential burden to the justice system. The program featured law and research professors from Duke University and the University of California Berkley, as well as U.S. District Judge Paul Grimm of the District of Maryland. The group discussed the limits of tools such as watermarking and Rule 901 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure regarding authenticating evidence. Read more about the discussion.