ROBERT ANTHONY FUSCO v. STATE OF TENNESSEE - Articles

All Content


Posted by: Landry Butler on Dec 11, 2017

Court: TN Court of Criminal Appeals

Attorneys 1:

Robert Anthony Fusco, Wartburg, Tennessee, pro se.

Attorneys 2:

Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; Brent C. Cherry, Senior Counsel; John W. Carney, Jr., District Attorney General; and Helen O. Young, Assistant District Attorney General, for the Appellee, State of Tennessee.

Judge(s): OGLE

The Petitioner, Robert Anthony Fusco, filed a pro se petition for post-conviction relief, alleging various instances of ineffective assistance of counsel. After a hearing, the post- conviction court denied relief. On appeal, the Petitioner contends that the post-conviction court erred by limiting his questioning of two police officers at the hearing. He also contends that his trial counsel was ineffective in a number of ways, including by failing to file motions to suppress, to ensure that the rule of sequestration was stringently enforced, to challenge the Petitioner’s convictions on double jeopardy grounds, to contest errors at the sentencing hearing, and to challenge acts of prosecutorial misconduct. Upon review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

Attachments: