Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

State v. Lee

Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee, Nashville

May 5, 2017

STATE OF TENNESSEE
v.
BOBBY E. LEE

          Assigned on Briefs April 19, 2017

         Appeal from the Criminal Court for Clay County No. 2014-CR-27 Gary McKenzie, Judge

         The Defendant, Bobby E. Lee, appeals his sentence of confinement after being convicted of two counts of delivery of Oxycodone, a Schedule II controlled substance. The trial court sentenced the Defendant to eleven months, twenty-nine days at seventy-five percent release eligibility. The Defendant argues that the trial court abused its discretion in imposing the maximum sentence and a term of incarceration. After thorough review of the record and applicable law, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

         Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgments of the Criminal Court Affirmed

          Bruce E. Myers (on appeal), John Philip Parsons (at trial), and Hershel Lacy (at the sentencing hearing), Livingston, Tennessee, for the appellant, Bobby E. Lee.

          Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; Renee W. Turner, Senior Counsel; Bryant C. Dunaway, District Attorney General; and Mark Gore, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

          John Everett Williams, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which James Curwood Witt, Jr., and Camille R. McMullen, JJ., joined.

          OPINION

          JOHN EVERETT WILLIAMS, JUDGE

         FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

         In June 2014, a Clay County grand jury indicted the Defendant on two counts of delivery of Oxycodone, a Schedule II controlled substance. At a jury trial, the evidence established that the Defendant sold Oxycodone pills to a confidential informant on September 7 and October 2, 2013. The confidential informant gave the pills to law enforcement officers after both purchases. The six recovered pills tested positive for Oxycodone. Following the conclusion of the proof, the jury found the Defendant guilty as charged.

         At the sentencing hearing, Ms. Casey Dewayne Brown, a probation officer with Community Probation Services, testified that she was responsible for creating the Defendant's presentence report, which was admitted into evidence. She stated that the Defendant had a prior conviction for violation of the open container law, a prior conviction for violation of the implied consent law, a dismissed charge for possession of a handgun while under the influence of an intoxicant, a dismissed charge for using worthless checks, and a prior conviction for storing high explosives not in conformity with United States Treasury regulations for which he was sentenced to probation. Ms. Brown testified that while on probation for the storing high explosives conviction, the Defendant violated his probation because he was found to be using illegal drugs. The trial court did not revoke his probation in light of his then-current drug treatment program. Ms. Brown stated that the Defendant violated his probation again because he was arrested for possession of a controlled substance. She also stated that the trial court subsequently revoked his probation and ordered him to serve four months in confinement. She confirmed that the Defendant had pending charges for driving under the influence and simple possession of a controlled substance.

         Ms. Brown testified that the Defendant did not have verified employment but that the Defendant reported working in construction for twenty-five years before receiving disability insurance in 2010. She also testified that although the Defendant tested positive for Oxycodone during a January 9, 2016, drug screening that was a condition of probation, he had a valid prescription for Oxycodone and tested negative for all other drugs. She stated that the Defendant had a tenth grade education.

         On cross-examination, Ms. Brown testified that the Defendant could read and write because she witnessed him complete the presentence report form. She stated that she believed the Defendant was married and had one child. She also stated that she recommended in the presentence report that the Defendant be placed on probation.

         At the conclusion of the sentencing hearing, the trial court noted that although the instant case involved misdemeanor sentencing, it would use guidance from felony sentencing statutes to reach a decision. The trial court found that consecutive sentencing was inappropriate for the Defendant's ultimate sentence because he was not a dangerous offender with an extensive criminal history. The trial court also found as enhancement factors that the Defendant had a previous history of criminal convictions and behavior, was the leader of the offense involving his co-defendant, and had failed to comply with previous conditions of probation. T.C.A. § 40-35-114(1), (2), (8) (2012). The trial court stressed that it was placing "great weight" on those enhancement factors. The trial court stated that the Defendant's two prior violations of probation were "real troubling" because both violations involved the Defendant's illegal use of controlled substances. The trial court stressed that the Defendant's instant misdemeanor convictions involved not "one criminal episode" but "two independent criminal offenses." In addressing the Defendant's prior criminal history, the trial court found that the Defendant had prior criminal convictions. The trial court also noted that the Defendant's last conviction was in 2005 but that he also had previous violations of probation. The trial court noted that it would not give weight to ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.