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. Tucker

Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee, Nashville

August 7, 2017

STATE OF TENNESSEE
v.
BART LEO TUCKER

          Session March 14, 2017 Heard at Belmont University College of Law [1]

         Appeal from the Circuit Court for Williamson County No. I-CR099094 Joseph Woodruff, Judge

         The Defendant, Bart Leo Tucker, was convicted by a Williamson County jury of one count of issuing a worthless check. See T.C.A. § 39-14-121. On appeal, the Defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence and contends that the trial court erred by denying his motion for judgment of acquittal. Following our review, we reverse the judgment of the trial court.

         Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Circuit Court Reversed and Dismissed

          Dustin Faeder, Nashville Tennessee, for the Defendant-Appellant, Bart Leo Tucker.

          Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; Alexander C. Vey, Assistant Attorney General; Kim R. Helper, District Attorney General; and Tammy J. Rettig, Assistant District Attorney General, for the Appellee, State of Tennessee.

          Camille R. McMullen, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which Robert W. Wedemeyer, J., joined. Timothy L. Easter, J., filed a separate opinion.

          OPINION

          CAMILLE R. McMULLEN, JUDGE

         On May 12, 2014, the Defendant purchased a truck from Walker Chevrolet in Franklin, Tennessee. The Defendant made a down payment for the truck in the amount of $15, 000 with a check dated May 12, 2014. On May 16, 2014, the Defendant's check was returned for insufficient funds. On September 14, 2015, the Defendant was indicted by a Williamson County Grand Jury for one count of issuing a worthless check, a Class C felony. See T.C.A. §§ 39-14-121(f) (Supp. 2013); 39-14-105(a)(4).

         The only witness testimony included in the record provided on appeal is from David Hamilton, the Walker Chevrolet finance manager at the time of the incident. Hamilton first met the Defendant on the day that he bought the truck, May 12, 2014. Hamilton said that he was later told by Walker Chevrolet's controller that the Defendant's check had been returned. Hamilton subsequently contacted the Defendant multiple times and testified that the Defendant "said he would take care of it" and bring another check, but he never did. When asked by the State whether he had "any reason to believe that this check was not good" at the time of the transaction, Hamilton replied, "None, whatsoever."

         On cross-examination, Hamilton testified that he had "never once accepted a postdated check." The following exchange then took place during Hamilton's cross-examination:

Defense counsel: Do you recall any discussion with [the Defendant] about whether the check was ready to clear as soon as it was written or whether he would need a little time for money to come into the account?
Hamilton: He did ask for two ...

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.