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.

Jones-Smith v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee, Jackson

April 25, 2018

MALIK JONES-SMITH
v.
STATE OF TENNESSEE

          Assigned on Briefs Date: April 3, 2018

          Appeal from the Criminal Court for Shelby County Nos. 13-03489, 13-03490, 13-03491, 13-03492, 13-05896, 13-05897, & 14-01647 Lee V. Coffee, Judge

         The Petitioner, Malik Jones-Smith, appeals from the Shelby County Criminal Court's denial of his petition for post-conviction relief. The Petitioner contends that his guilty pleas were not knowingly and voluntarily entered due to the ineffective assistance of his trial counsel. Following our review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court. However, we remand the case to the post-conviction court for entry of a corrected judgment form with respect to one of the Petitioner's convictions.

         Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Criminal Court Affirmed; Case Remanded

          Ernest J. Beasley, Memphis, Tennessee, for the appellant, Malik Jones-Smith.

          Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; Zachary T. Hinkle, Assistant Attorney General; Amy P. Weirich, District Attorney General; and Alanda Horne Dwyer, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

          D. Kelly Thomas, Jr., J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which Robert L. Holloway, Jr., and J. Ross Dyer., JJ., joined.

          OPINION

          D. KELLY THOMAS, JR., JUDGE

         FACTUAL BACKGROUND

         The Petitioner was indicted for seven counts of aggravated robbery, two counts of attempted aggravated robbery, one count of especially aggravated kidnapping, one count of aggravated burglary, and one count of employing a firearm during the commission of a dangerous felony. On December 11, 2014, the Petitioner entered into a plea agreement with the State. The Petitioner agreed to plead guilty to all of the charged offenses in exchange for the following sentencing recommendations from the State:

Group

Indictment

Offense

Sentence

1

13-03489

Aggravated Robbery

8 years

Aggravated Robbery

8 years

13-03490

Attempted Aggravated Robbery

6 years

Attempted Aggravated Robbery

6 years

13-03491

Aggravated Robbery

8 years

13-03492

Aggravated Robbery

8 years

2

13-05896

Especially Aggravated Kidnapping

15 years

Aggravated Robbery

12 years

Aggravated Burglary

12 years

13-05897

Aggravated Robbery

12 years

14-01647

Aggravated Robbery

12 years

3

13-05896

Employment of a Firearm

6 years

         The plea agreement further provided that the sentences in each of the groups above were to be served concurrently to each other but consecutively to the other groups, for a total effective sentence of twenty-nine years.

         The offenses in Group 1 were committed between April 5 and April 7, 2013. The Petitioner was arrested and released on bail for those offenses. The Petitioner then committed the offenses in Groups 2 and 3 between June 11 and June 13, 2013. Therefore, the sentences for Groups 2 and 3 were statutorily required to be served consecutively to the sentences in Group 1. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-20-111(b). Similarly, the sentence for Group 3 was statutorily required to be served consecutively to the sentences for Group 2. See Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-1324(e)(1). According to the prosecutor at the guilty plea submission hearing, this sentencing arrangement was "the absolute bare minimum for . . . all these indictments."

         The Petitioner was sixteen years old when he was arrested for the offenses listed above and seventeen years old at the time of the plea submission hearing. The Petitioner stated that it was his signature on the plea agreement forms and that his trial counsel had reviewed with him the plea agreement forms and the rights he would be waiving. The Petitioner further stated that he understood the plea agreement forms. The trial court then reviewed the various rights that the Petitioner was waiving by pleading guilty. The Petitioner stated that he ...


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.