STATE OF TENNESSEE V. RAY ROWLAND - Articles

All Content


Posted by: Chandra Williams on Oct 30, 2015

Court: TN Court of Criminal Appeals

Attorneys 1:

M. Haden Lawyer, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellant, Ray Rowland.

Attorneys 2:

Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; Caitlin Smith, Assistant Attorney General; Amy P. Weirich, District Attorney General; and Glen Baity and Billy Bond, Assistant District Attorneys General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

Judge(s): HOLLOWAY

Ray Rowland (“the Defendant”) filed a Motion for Return of Property pursuant to Rule 41(g)1 of the Tennessee Rules of Criminal Procedure. The trial court found that it did not have jurisdiction to hear the case and dismissed the Defendant’s motion. On appeal, we conclude that the trial court does have jurisdiction. We reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand the case for a hearing.

Attachments: