Michael Notaro, Defendant, pled guilty to three counts of sexual exploitation of a minor with an agreed-upon sentence of 10 years for each conviction, to be served consecutively for a total effective sentence of 30 years at 100% in exchange for the State agreeing not to seek further prosecution for any other offenses under investigation. Defendant did not seek a direct appeal of his sentence. Instead, Defendant filed a motion pursuant to Rule 36.1 of the Tennessee Rules of Criminal Procedure in which he argued that his sentence was illegal. The trial court dismissed the motion for failure to state a colorable claim. Defendant appeals. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The Defendant, Gregory L. Nelson, appeals the trial court’s revocation of his eight-year sentence for unlawful possession of a weapon by a convicted felon. On appeal, he argues that the trial court erred by fully revoking his probation and ordering him to serve the remainder of his sentence in confinement. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The defendant, Cedric D. Marshall, appeals the Davidson County Criminal Court’s order revoking his community corrections sentence and resentencing him to an effective sentence of seven years’ incarceration for his guilty-pleaded convictions of evading arrest, burglary, and theft of property. Because the defendant’s notice of appeal is untimely, we dismiss the appeal.

Legal Aid Society of Middle Tennessee & the Cumberlands is hosting a Pro Bono Appreciation Happy Hour to thank and recognize its volunteers. The event is this Thursday from 4:30-6 p.m. CDT at 501 Commerce St. at Fifth & Broadway in Nashville, and is sponsored by Polsinelli and K&L Gates. Find more information and RSVP here. 

The Pettioner, Victercika Gilchrease, appeals from the post-conviction court’s denial of her petition for post-conviction relief from her guilty plea convictions for second degree murder and two counts of aggravated assault, for which she is serving an agreed, effective twenty-one-year sentence. On appeal, she contends that the post-conviction court erred in denying relief on her ineffective assistance of counsel claims. We affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

The Defendant, Lorie Ann Gerbis, was convicted following a bench trial of two counts of aggravated assault. On appeal, the Defendant argues that the evidence was insufficient to support her convictions. Specifically, she contends that the State’s evidence was inadequate to establish her identity as the perpetrator beyond a reasonable doubt. After review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Petitioner, Micah Joshua Ford, alias Joseph Tolbert, III, appeals the denial of his postconviction petition, arguing that the post-conviction court erred in finding that he received the effective assistance of counsel at trial and on direct appeal. He also argues that he is entitled to a new trial under the doctrine of cumulative error. Following our review of the entire record and the briefs of the parties, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

After a long-term marriage, the parties divorced. The trial court, which found the husband’s testimony not to be credible, set the value of the marital property, divided the marital property, and awarded alimony in futuro to the wife. The husband appeals, challenging the credibility finding, the trial court’s valuation of the marital property, the division of property, and the alimony award. We affirm the trial court’s valuation and distribution of the marital property, but we vacate the trial court’s alimony award, remanding for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

The Defendant, Bradley Dwight Bowen, appeals from his jury convictions for possession of one-half gram or more of methamphetamine with intent to manufacture, sell, or deliver; simple possession of cocaine; possession of drug paraphernalia; and possession of a firearm by a convicted felon; for which he received an effective ten-year sentence. On appeal, he challenges the trial court’s denial of (1) his motion to suppress the evidence seized as a result of his detention and (2) his motion to continue requesting additional time to prepare his pro se defense. Following our review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

The plaintiffs filed this breach of contract action against their homeowners association for failure to rectify alleged violations of the neighborhood restrictions. The plaintiffs sought a declaratory judgment establishing that the issues complained of were actual violations of the restrictions. The trial court dismissed the action in favor of the homeowners association and the plaintiffs’ neighbors who joined as interested parties. We affirm.