Assigned on Briefs May 2, 2018
from the Criminal Court for Shelby County No. 02-09113 Chris
defendant, Jasper Vick, appeals from the Shelby County
Criminal Court's denial of his Tennessee Rule of Criminal
Procedure 36.1 motion to correct an illegal sentence. The
defendant contends his sentences are illegal because the
court clerk failed to sign his original and superseding
indictments. Discerning no error, we affirm the judgment of
the trial court.
R. App. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Criminal Court
Vick, Clifton, Tennessee, Pro Se.
Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; Ronald
L. Coleman, Assistant Attorney General; Amy P. Weirich,
District Attorney General; and Karen Cook, Assistant District
Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.
Ross Dyer, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which
Alan E. Glenn and Timothy L. Easter, JJ., joined.
ROSS DYER, JUDGE
crimes committed on February 14, 2001, against his
fourteen-year-old victim, the defendant was indicted for
three counts of aggravated kidnapping and one count of sexual
battery. A superseding indictment issued charging one count
of especially aggravated kidnapping, two counts of aggravated
kidnapping, and one count of sexual battery, and a jury
convicted the defendant of the same. The trial court merged the
defendant's two aggravated kidnapping convictions into
his especially aggravated kidnapping conviction and sentenced
the defendant to an effective forty years in confinement.
Specifically, the trial court imposed thirty-six years for
the especially aggravated kidnapping conviction and four
years for the sexual battery conviction. In doing so, the
trial court found the defendant to be a Range II, multiple
offender based, in part, on a 1973 conviction in South
Carolina for the offense of assault and battery of a high and
aggravated nature. State v. Jasper L. Vick, No.
W2005-00467-CCA-R3-CD, 2006 WL 722173, at *8-11 (Tenn. Crim.
App. Mar. 22, 2006). The defendant subsequently appealed his
convictions and sentencing.
direct appeal, this Court affirmed the defendant's
convictions, but remanded for resentencing "for the
trial court to determine whether the specific elements of the
defendant's South Carolina conviction would have
constituted a Class C felony in Tennessee under the state of
the law as it existed at the time of the offense."
State v. Vick, 242 S.W.3d 792, 794 (Tenn. Crim. App.
2007) (citing Vick, 2006 WL 722173, at *11). Upon
remand, the trial court found the defendant's South
Carolina conviction constituted at least a Class C felony,
and again sentenced the defendant as a Range II offender.
Id. at 795. The defendant appealed, and this Court
ultimately instructed the trial court to sentence the
defendant as a Range I offender, resulting in an effective
sentence of twenty-six years. The petitioner sought
post-conviction relief, but failed both directly and on
appeal. See Jasper Lee Vick v. State, No.
W2012-01477-CCA-R3-PC, 2013 WL 2446280 (Tenn. Crim. App. June
August 15, 2017, the defendant filed a pro se motion
to correct an illegal sentence pursuant to Rule 36.1 of the
Tennessee Rules of Criminal Procedure. In the motion, the
defendant alleged the court clerk failed to sign his
indictments, thus rendering his sentences for the convicted
offenses illegal. The trial court summarily dismissed the
motion finding the defendant failed to state a colorable
claim, and this appeal followed.
appeal, the defendant claims the trial court erred in denying
his Rule 36.1 motion to correct an illegal sentence. The
defendant argues his sentences are illegal because his
indictments were not signed by the court clerk. The State
contends the defendant has not demonstrated a colorable claim
for Rule 36.1 relief as ...