STATE OF TENNESSEE v. CARLOS CAMPBELL - Articles

All Content


Posted by: Chandra Williams on Oct 20, 2015

Court: TN Court of Criminal Appeals

Attorneys 1:

Bruce E. Poston, Knoxville, Tennessee (at trial); and Loretta G. Cravens, Knoxville, Tennessee (on appeal), for the appellant, Carlos Campbell

Attorneys 2:

Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; Nicholas W. Spangler, Assistant Attorney General; Randall Eugene Nichols, District Attorney General; and Ta Kisha Fitzgerald, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee. Terry A. Maroney, Nashville, Tennessee; and Joshua A. Tepfer and Steven A. Drizin, Chicago Illinois, for amicus curiae, Center on Wrongful Convictions of Youth, Bluhm Legal Clinic, Northwestern University School of Law.

Judge(s): THOMAS

The Defendant, Carlos Campbell, was indicted for seven counts of attempted first degree murder, a Class A felony; two counts of employing a firearm during the commission of a dangerous felony, a Class C felony; and two counts of felony reckless endangerment by discharging a firearm into a habitation, a Class C felony. See Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 39-12-101, -13-103, -13-302, -17-1324(b)(1). Prior to trial, the State dismissed the reckless endangerment charges. Following a jury trial, the Defendant was convicted of two counts of attempted first degree murder, one count of employing a firearm during the commission of a dangerous felony, and five counts of misdemeanor reckless endangerment. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-103(b)(1). The jury acquitted the Defendant of the other charge of employing a firearm during the commission of a dangerous felony. The trial court sentenced the Defendant to a total effective sentence of forty-six years. On appeal, the Defendant contends (1) that the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress one of his confessions to the police; (2) that the portion of his confession played at trial contained impermissible evidence of other prior bad acts; (3) that there was no evidence corroborating his confessions; (4) that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his convictions; (5) that the trial court erred in setting the length of his sentences for attempted first degree murder; and (6) that the trial court erred in imposing partial consecutive sentences.1 At oral arguments, we instructed the parties to submit supplemental briefs on the issue of whether misdemeanor reckless endangerment is a lesser-included offense of attempted first degree murder. Following our review, we affirm the Defendant?s convictions and sentences for attempted first degree murder and employing a firearm during the commission of a dangerous felony. However, we conclude that misdemeanor reckless endangerment is not a lesser-included offense of attempted first degree murder; therefore, the Defendant?s convictions for misdemeanor reckless endangerment are reversed and dismissed.

Attachments: