A Montgomery County jury convicted Petitioner, Curtis O’Neal Shelton, Jr., of two counts of first degree felony murder, one count of especially aggravated burglary, four counts of especially aggravated kidnapping, three counts of aggravated kidnapping, and seven counts of attempted aggravated robbery. After merging the two felony murder convictions, the trial court sentenced Petitioner to an effective term of life in prison plus twenty years. Petitioner appealed, and this court affirmed his convictions and sentence. Petitioner then filed a petition for post-conviction relief, which the post-conviction court dismissed after a hearing. On appeal, Petitioner argues that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to (1) communicate with Petitioner effectively; (2) raise sufficient, proper objections to the State’s evidence; (3) introduce evidence on Petitioner’s behalf; and (4) file a timely motion for new trial. After review, we affirm the post-conviction court’s judgment.

Defendant, Emanuel Kidega Samson, was convicted of three counts of civil rights intimidation, one count of first-degree premeditated murder, seven counts of attempted first-degree murder, seven counts of employing a firearm during the commission of a dangerous felony, twenty-four counts of aggravated assault, and one count of reckless endangerment. He received a sentence of life without the possibility of parole for his firstdegree murder conviction. The trial court imposed an effective sentence of 281 years for the remaining convictions to be served consecutively to the life sentence. On appeal, Defendant argues that the trial court improperly excluded expert testimony as to his mental health; that the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions for civil rights intimidation, attempted first-degree premeditated murder, and first-degree premeditated murder; that his conviction for civil rights intimidation in Count 3 of the indictment and his convictions for employing a firearm during the commission of a dangerous felony violated double jeopardy; that the State failed to make an election of offenses as to his convictions for civil rights intimidation; that the trial court erred by admitting a note he wrote; that the trial court erred by admitting a portion of the recordings of his jail phone calls; that the trial court incorrectly charged the jury that his failure to remember the facts of the offenses was not a defense; and that his sentence was improper. Following our review of the entire record, oral argument, and the parties’ briefs, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Tennessee Attorney General Jonathan Skrmetti has filed public comments in response to proposed new federal efficiency standards for refrigerators, refrigerator-freezers, freezers and washing machines. The comments, joined by a coalition of state attorneys general, argue that the proposals will have negative effects on consumers, particularly low-income individuals. Access the comments here.

The defendant, Shelby Brooks, appeals the Sevier County Circuit Court’s order revoking her probation and requiring her to serve the balance of her five-year sentence for the sale of a Schedule II controlled substance and the sale of a Schedule III controlled substance in confinement. Discerning no error, we affirm.

Mother appeals the trial court’s termination of her parental rights as to her two oldest children. As grounds for termination the trial court found abandonment for failure to provide a suitable home, substantial noncompliance with the permanency plan, persistent conditions, severe child abuse, and failure to manifest a willingness and ability to assume custody. The trial court also found that termination was in the best interest of both children. We find that clear and convincing evidence supports the trial court’s findings as to the grounds for termination and the best interests of the children. Accordingly, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Nashville District Attorney Glenn Funk has joined a motion filed by NewsChannel 5 to unseal court documents related to a search of his office by the Tennessee Attorney General’s office. In his motion, Funk argues there is a conflict between the attorney general’s office representing him in cases while conducting an on-going criminal investigation into his office. In the motion, he also says that accessing the documents will reveal whether he has an obligation to report the attorney general to the Board of Professional Responsibility, request an advisory opinion from the board, and/or request court orders requiring the attorney general to withdraw from representing his office in all pending and future matters.

The trial court granted Defendants/Appellees’ motion for a directed verdict at the close of Plaintiff/Appellant’s proof. Discerning no error, we affirm.

We granted this extraordinary appeal to determine whether the Governmental Tort Liability Act, Tennessee Code Annotated sections 29-20-307 and 29-20-313(b), requires severance in cases involving both non-governmental and governmental entities. Following the legislature’s amendment of these statutes in 1994, we conclude that, when a jury is demanded, the entire case against both non-governmental and governmental entities shall be tried to a jury without severance.

This is a dispute involving the usage and subdivision of real property in McMinn County. The plaintiffs sought declaratory judgment that a restrictive covenant contained in the deed to their property applied to other parcels originating from the same parent tract. Upon competing motions for summary judgment and following a hearing, the trial court entered an order granting summary judgment in favor of the defendants and dismissing the plaintiffs’ claims with prejudice. The trial court determined that the language in the plaintiffs’ deed was not sufficient to create an express restrictive covenant upon the property subsequently conveyed to the defendants and that the plaintiffs did not produce sufficient evidence of a “common plan” for the original tract such as would warrant imposition of an implied negative reciprocal easement. The plaintiffs have appealed. Discerning no reversible error, we affirm.

This is a dependency and neglect case concerning two minor children. Appellee Tennessee Department of Children’s Services received a referral of potential child abuse. Following a brief investigation, the oldest child was taken into DCS custody after he admitted to sexually assaulting Appellant, his mother. Three days later the juvenile court sua sponte ordered the younger child into DCS custody due to allegations of domestic violence and sexual abuse in the home. Later, the juvenile court adjudicated both children dependent and neglected. On de novo review, the circuit court found the older child dependent and neglected under Tennessee Code Annotated section 37-1-102(b)(13)(A) and found both children dependent and neglected under section 37-1-102(b)(13)(F) and (G). Mother appeals. Discerning no error, we affirm.