This case involved an appeal by Debo’s Bail Bond Company, LLC, challenging a trial court order denying its petition to be released from a $9,000 surety bond after defendant Sergio Lara failed to appear for arraignment on a domestic assault charge. The bond company argued that it should be relieved of liability under Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-11-201(c) because the defendant had fled to Illinois, where bounty hunting is illegal, and the district attorney’s office had refused to initiate extradition proceedings due to cost considerations. The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the denial of the petition and the final forfeiture judgment. The court reasoned that the statute excuses a surety’s obligation only if the detaining authority refuses a detainer, not when the State declines to pursue extradition, and that prior precedent establishes sureties remain responsible when a defendant voluntarily flees the jurisdiction.
The case involved Willie Austin Davis, who was convicted by a jury of aggravated criminal trespass, a Class A misdemeanor, after entering the grounds of Covenant Presbyterian Church in Nashville despite repeated warnings and a formal ban stemming from his disruptive campaign alleging a coverup of child abuse by a former church member. Davis, representing himself on appeal, argued that he was denied a fair trial because the trial judge failed to disclose relationships with former and current church members, a magistrate, and others, which he claimed created an appearance of bias requiring recusal. The Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee affirmed the trial court's judgment, holding that the defendant failed to show any reasonable basis to question the judge's impartiality under the applicable rules, noting that disclosed connections involved no personal bias, disputed facts, or improper influence and that the judge had granted the pro se defendant broad latitude during proceedings.
The case involves Robert Jason Burdick's consolidated appeal from the denial of his post-conviction petitions and the dismissal of his petition for writ of error coram nobis following convictions for aggravated rape, kidnapping, and related offenses in Williamson County. The petitioner claimed ineffective assistance of counsel for failing to challenge the trial court's use of enhancement factors in sentencing and for not moving to suppress evidence from a warrantless GPS device placed on his vehicle, and he also sought due process tolling of the coram nobis statute of limitations based on newly discovered evidence about a search warrant affidavit. The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the lower court's rulings, holding that the petitioner did not establish deficient performance by counsel or prejudice, that no evidence from the GPS was used at trial, and that the alleged new evidence was not material and would not have altered the outcome. The court further found no abuse of discretion in denying tolling or relief on the coram nobis claims.
The case involved two defendants, Glenn Brown and Thomas Byrd, who were jointly tried and convicted by a Knox County jury of multiple drug offenses, including possession with intent to sell or deliver 0.5 grams or more of cocaine within 1000 feet of a school, possession with intent to sell or deliver a controlled substance analogue, and possession of marijuana; Brown was additionally convicted on various firearm-related charges. On appeal, Byrd challenged the sufficiency of the evidence supporting his convictions and the admission of evidence concerning his failure to contest the forfeiture of seized cash, while Brown challenged the sufficiency of the evidence for his drug and firearm convictions, the denial of his motion to suppress evidence from the traffic stop, and alleged inconsistencies in jury instructions that affected verdict unanimity. The Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee reviewed the record and affirmed all judgments of the trial court, concluding that the evidence was sufficient, the trial court did not abuse its discretion in evidentiary rulings or the suppression decision, and any instructional issues did not warrant reversal.
The case involved Joshua Williams, who was convicted after a trial of multiple offenses including especially aggravated burglary, attempted first degree murder, and firearm-related charges arising from a 2014 armed burglary of an apartment that resulted in shootings. Williams appealed his convictions for attempted first degree murder, claiming insufficient evidence that he or his co-defendant intended to murder the victims. The Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee affirmed the convictions, reasoning that the evidence supported a finding of criminal responsibility because Williams participated in planning the burglary, armed himself, and took actions consistent with assisting in the crimes that led to the attempted murders.
The case involved Javaris Wilson, who was convicted by a Davidson County jury of first degree premeditated murder and second degree murder (merged into one conviction) for the 2016 shooting death of Samuel Huff in Nashville. Wilson appealed his life sentence solely on the claim that the evidence was insufficient to establish his identity as the shooter. The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, reasoning that direct eyewitness testimony from multiple witnesses who knew Wilson by sight, combined with motion-activated surveillance footage identified by a detective and additional circumstantial evidence from social media, allowed a rational jury to find him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.