The TBA is partnering with the Tennessee Urban Forestry Council (TUFC) to host a half-day forum focused on urban forestry and legal issues affecting municipal governance and sustainability. The "Trees and the Law" event kicks off the TUFC's annual meeting, which will highlight how individuals, organizations and municipalities are engaging to make an impact in communities. Join colleagues on Nov. 13 at noon CST at the Scarritt Bennett Center in Nashville. Get session information and register here. Members of the TBA Environmental Law Section enjoy discounted registration. Not a section member? Join here.

The Southern Region of the National Black Law Student Association (SRBLSA) will hold its 54th regional conference, "Leading the Charge: Together Toward Tomorrow," in Nashville Feb. 19-23, 2025. The event will consist of workshops, a job fair, panels and a mock trial competition. The event coordinators are seeking individuals willing to judge the competition and serve on panels. Click here for more information or contact Tia Nickens.

Twenty members of the TBA gathered at Old Stone Fort State Archaeological Park in Manchester last month to participate in the Young Lawyers Division's (YLD) inaugural Exploration CLE. Attendees heard a presentation on ethical pitfalls for new lawyers as well as two presentations focused on health and wellness. A highlight of the day was a ranger-led hike through the park and lunch at a picnic pavilion. The Exploration series is produced in collaboration with the TBA Attorney Well Being Committee and will continue at Fall Creek Falls State Park on May 30. See photos from the event.

Twenty members of the TBA recently gathered at Old Stone Fort State Archaeological Park in Manchester to participate in the Young Lawyers Division's (YLD) inaugural Exploration CLE. Attendees heard a presentation on ethical pitfalls for new lawyers as well as two presentations focused on health and wellness. A highlight of the day was a ranger-led hike through the park and lunch at a picnic pavilion. The Exploration series is produced in collaboration with the TBA Attorney Well Being Committee. Stay tuned for information on the next state park visit. See photos from the event.

CHAD A. READLER, Circuit Judge. Adrian Galvez-Bravo, a native and citizen of Mexico, seeks review of a Board of Immigration Appeals order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. Galvez-Bravo contends that the Board’s order ignored his core argument and deviated from other Board decisions. While we have jurisdiction to review Galvez-Bravo’s legal challenges to the Board’s order, we conclude that the Board engaged in reasoned decisionmaking in denying his motion. Accordingly, we deny his petition for review. Galvez-Bravo entered the United States in 1994. Save for a brief return to Mexico to marry his wife, he has lived in the Memphis area, working as a subcontractor. The couple has three children, two of whom are U.S. citizens. Following Galvez-Bravo’s brush with the law in 2013, the Department of Homeland Security initiated removal proceedings against him, alleging he was a noncitizen present in the United States without being admitted or paroled. See 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i). After conceding the charge, Galvez-Bravo sought cancellation of removal under § 240A of the Immigration and Nationality Act. See id. § 1229b(b). For these reasons, we deny the petition for review.

CHAD A. READLER, Circuit Judge. Adrian Galvez-Bravo, a native and citizen of Mexico, seeks review of a Board of Immigration Appeals order denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings. Galvez-Bravo contends that the Board’s order ignored his core argument and deviated from other Board decisions. While we have jurisdiction to review Galvez-Bravo’s legal challenges to the Board’s order, we conclude that the Board engaged in reasoned decisionmaking in denying his motion. Accordingly, we deny his petition for review. Galvez-Bravo entered the United States in 1994. Save for a brief return to Mexico to marry his wife, he has lived in the Memphis area, working as a subcontractor. The couple has three children, two of whom are U.S. citizens. Following Galvez-Bravo’s brush with the law in 2013, the Department of Homeland Security initiated removal proceedings against him, alleging he was a noncitizen present in the United States without being admitted or paroled. See 8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(6)(A)(i). After conceding the charge, Galvez-Bravo sought cancellation of removal under § 240A of the Immigration and Nationality Act. See id. § 1229b(b). For these reasons, we deny the petition for review.

A Tipton County jury convicted the Petitioner, Howard Jefferson Atkins, of first degree premeditated murder in 2000, and the trial court imposed a life sentence. The Petitioner later applied for a writ of habeas corpus, arguing that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to hear his case because the juvenile court did not make the necessary statutory findings to transfer his case to the circuit court. The habeas corpus court summarily denied the application, finding that the Petitioner failed to state a colorable claim for relief. Upon our review, we respectfully affirm the judgment of the habeas corpus court.

The Petitioner, Queshan Brooks, appeals the trial court’s summary dismissal of his petition for post-conviction relief. Upon our review of the record and the applicable law, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

The Defendant, Christopher L. Dowlen, appeals the Robertson County Circuit Court’s order revoking his probation and requiring him to serve his original four-year sentence for his conviction for failure to register as a sex offender in confinement. The Defendant contends the trial court abused its discretion in revoking his probation and ordering him to serve his sentence in confinement (1) by finding sufficient evidence that the Defendant possessed a firearm in violation of his probation, and (2) by failing to consider whether full revocation of his sentence would serve the “ends of justice” and “best interest” of the Defendant. After review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The Defendant, Andrew Martin Robbs, pleaded guilty to driving under the influence per se, third offense, a Class A misdemeanor. See T.C.A. § 55-10-401 (2020). The trial court sentenced the Defendant to eleven months, twenty-nine days suspended to probation after 120 days in confinement. On appeal, the Defendant presents a certified question of law challenging the sufficiency of the affidavit of complaint in support of the arrest warrant. Because the certified question fails to identify the scope and limits of the legal issue reserved, we conclude that we are without jurisdiction to consider this appeal. The appeal is dismissed.