In 2021, the Defendant, Timothy Eugene Wells, pleaded guilty to sexual assault by an authority figure, as a Range II offender, in exchange for a sentence of six to ten years with the manner of service to be determined by the trial court. After a sentencing hearing, the trial court imposed an effective sentence of eight years of incarceration. On appeal, the Defendant asserts that the trial court abused its discretion when it ordered him to serve his sentence in confinement. After review, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Defendant, Tyrone T. Roach, entered a nolo contendere plea to one count of sexual battery. The trial court imposed a diverted one-year sentence. As part of the plea, Defendant attempted to reserve a certified question of law under Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 37(b)(2) as to whether the four-year delay between the grand jury presentment on the sexual battery charge and his arrest on the presentment violated his rights to a speedy trial and due process. The State contends that this court lacks jurisdiction to hear an appeal from a diverted sentence. In the alternative, the State argues that Defendant did not reserve the certified question properly, and even if the certified question were reserved, the trial court did not violate his right to a speedy trial. Defendant has not responded to the State’s contention regarding jurisdiction. We conclude we lack jurisdiction to consider Defendant’s appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal.

Defendant, Christopher Alan Peters, was convicted by a McMinn County jury of aggravated burglary, and the trial court sentenced him as a Range II offender to ten years to serve in confinement. On appeal, Defendant argues that there is insufficient evidence to sustain his conviction because the State presented no evidence that he entered the residence with the intent to commit a theft. Following our review of the entire record, the briefs of the parties, and the applicable law, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

We granted this interlocutory appeal to review the trial court’s order denying the State’s motion to admit the preliminary hearing testimony of one of the victims who had subsequently, and unrelatedly, been killed, and granting the Defendant’s motion to exclude said testimony. The Defendant argued that the trial court should exclude the victim’s former testimony because the State withheld exculpatory information prior to the preliminary hearing in violation of the Defendant’s rights to confrontation, due process, and a fair trial. The trial court agreed with the Defendant, and the State appeals. Following our review, we reverse the trial court’s order and remand the case for further proceedings.

Defendant, Eugene W. Jones, appeals the trial court’s order revoking his probationary sentence for unlawful possession of a firearm by a convicted felon with a previous conviction for a violent felony and simple possession of marijuana. Following our review of the entire record and the briefs of the parties, we find no abuse of discretion and affirm the judgment of the trial court.

This case involves an appeal from the trial court’s appointment of a permanent conservator to oversee the person and property of the appellant, Tara Young. Ms. Young’s brother, Daniel Wood, petitioned for a conservatorship after he discovered that Ms. Young had been admitted to the Vanderbilt Adult Psychiatric Hospital following a car accident. After several months of proceedings and a two-day trial, the trial court concluded that a conservatorship was warranted and appointed a conservator for the person and property of Ms. Young. The trial court further determined that medical decisions should remain vested with Ms. Young. Ms. Young timely appealed. On appeal, Mr. Wood did not file a brief in response to Ms. Young’s appellate brief. Upon review, we conclude that Ms. Young’s brief lacks a statement of the issues presented for review and therefore does not comport with Tennessee Rule of Appellate Procedure 27(a)(4). Inasmuch as Ms. Young has not presented any issues on appeal as required by Rule 27, we dismiss this appeal.

This appeal arises from a divorce after a very brief marriage. The parties had one young son at the time of the divorce. The trial court declared the parties divorced, named the mother primary residential parent, largely adopted her proposed parenting plan, and calculated child support after imputing income to the mother based on a finding of voluntary underemployment. The father appealed and raises three issues, primarily arguing that he should be named primary residential parent or at least have additional parenting time. The mother raises a host of issues regarding various other provisions of the parenting plan. For the following reasons, we affirm the decision of the circuit court as modified.

In 2020, Ebony Robinson (“Defendant”) pleaded guilty to vehicular homicide by intoxication, aggravated assault, resisting arrest, and driving without a license. The trial court imposed a ten-year sentence largely suspended to probation with periodic weeks of confinement for the first three years. The State appealed the sentence, arguing that a 2017 amendment to the probation eligibility statute, Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-35- 303, prohibits defendants who are convicted of vehicular homicide by intoxication from receiving any form of probation. The Court of Criminal Appeals agreed with the State and reversed the trial court, ordering Defendant to serve the full sentence in confinement. The intermediate court concluded that the amended probation statute expressly prohibits probation of any kind, including periodic or split confinement, for criminal defendants convicted of vehicular homicide by intoxication. After reviewing the relevant statutes, this Court affirms the Court of Criminal Appeals and holds that the clear and precise language of the 2017 amendment to the probation eligibility statute prohibits all forms of probation for a defendant convicted of vehicular homicide by intoxication. Accordingly, we affirm the decision of the Court of Criminal Appeals.

In October, Tennessee lawyers are joining colleagues across the country to increase meaningful access to justice and commitment to pro bono work. Now in its 15th year, Tennessee’s statewide Celebrate Pro Bono Month initiative brings together legal services providers with bar associations, law schools, law firms and individual volunteers to offer free services to those unable to afford a lawyer. The month of October is an opportunity to focus attention on the significant need for pro bono services as well as a time to celebrate the outstanding work of those in the legal community who volunteer their services throughout the year. Events, including in-person and virtual opportunities to volunteer, will be promoted in TBA Today and via social media. The American Bar Association's National Pro Bono Celebration will be held the week of Oct. 22, with the theme "Voices of Democracy: Ensuring Justice for All." If you have information about an upcoming pro bono event, please share it with TBA at tbatoday@tnbar.org.

Franklin Orrin Craft died on Sept. 15 at age 88. A graduate of Memphis State University and Southern Law University, he passed the Tennessee bar in 1961. In 1968, he started Dennies Contracting Co. Inc., sold the company and retired in 1986. He and his wife moved to Siesta Key, Florida, in 1992. A memorial service will be held Oct. 8 at 2 p.m. EDT at Robert Toale & Sons Funeral Home, 170 Honore Ave., Sarasota, Florida 34232. A Memphis remembering will be scheduled at a later date. In lieu of flowers, a donation may be made to a charity of the donor’s choice.