DAVID KYLE GILLEY v. STATE OF TENNESSEE - Articles

All Content


Posted by: Tanja Trezise on Nov 1, 2012

Court: TN Court of Criminal Appeals

Attorneys 1:

Ann C. Short, Robert R. Kurtz, Gianna Maio, Heather G. Parker. Rebecca S. Parsons, and Lindsay N. Graham, of the University of Tennessee College of Law Innocence Clinic, Knoxville, Tennesse (on appeal); John Drake, Murfreesboro, Tennessee (at the postconviction hearing), for the appellant, David Kyle Gilley.

Attorneys 2:

Robert E. Cooper, Jr., Attorney General and Reporter; Mark A. Fulks, Assistant Attorney General; William C. Whitesell, District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

Judge(s): WILLIAMS

After a trial by jury, the petitioner was found guilty of first degree (premeditated) murder, and he was sentenced to life in prison. His conviction was affirmed by this court on direct appeal. The petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief, which was denied by the post-conviction court following an evidentiary hearing. On appeal, the petitioner claims that the post-conviction court erred by: (1) ruling that the State did not violate the petitioner’s due process right to favorable evidence by failing to provide information related to the testimony of a State witness; (2) ruling that the petitioner did not receive ineffective assistance of counsel at this trial, and (3) denying his request for post-conviction DNA analysis. After carefully reviewing the record and the arguments of the parties, we conclude that the evidence does not preponderate against the post-conviction court’s finding that the State in fact provided the petitioner with access to the favorable evidence in question and that the trial court did not err in its conclusion that the petitioner received effective assistance of counsel at trial. We further conclude that the post-conviction court was within its discretion in denying the petitioner’s request for additional DNA analysis. Consequently, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

Attachments: