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.

Madkins v. Leiback

Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee, Nashville

June 26, 2018

RICHARD EARL MADKINS, JR.
v.
BLAIR LEIBACK, WARDEN

          Assigned on Briefs December 13, 2017

          Appeal from the Circuit Court for Trousdale County No. 2016-CV-4582 John D. Wootten, Jr., Judge

         The Petitioner, Richard Earl Madkins, Jr., filed a petition in the Trousdale County Circuit Court seeking habeas corpus relief from his conviction of especially aggravated robbery and resulting twenty-five-year sentence, alleging that the trial court did not have jurisdiction to convict or sentence him because he was arrested for the offense without a warrant. The habeas corpus court denied relief without a hearing, and the Petitioner appeals. Upon review, we affirm the judgment of the habeas corpus court.

         Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Circuit Court Affirmed

          Richard Earl Madkins, Jr., Pro Se, Hartsville, Tennessee.

          Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; Alexander C. Vey, Assistant Attorney General; and Tom P. Thompson, Jr., District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

          Norma McGee Ogle, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which Camille R. McMullen and Timothy L. Easter, JJ., joined.

          OPINION

          NORMA MCGEE OGLE, JUDGE

         I. Factual Background

         In September 1993, the Petitioner and his codefendant shot the victim while she was in her car and removed a sack containing $15, 000 from the trunk. State v. Madkins, 989 S.W.2d 697, 698 (Tenn. 1999). A jury convicted the Petitioner of especially aggravated robbery and attempted felony murder, and he received consecutive, sixty-year sentences. Id. Ultimately, our supreme court reversed the Petitioner's conviction of attempted felony murder, and the trial court resentenced him to twenty-five years for especially aggravated robbery. See Richard Earl Madkins, Jr. v. State, No. W2015-02238-CCA-R3-HC, 2016 WL 6312037, at *1-2 (Tenn. Crim. App. at Jackson, Oct. 28, 2016).

         According to the Petitioner's brief, he filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in the Trousdale County Circuit Court on December 20, 2016, and the habeas corpus court denied the petition on February 13, 2017.[1] On March 17, 2017, the Petitioner filed a motion titled "Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment and Memorandum of Law" in the Trousdale County Circuit Court. In the motion, the Petitioner raised various grounds as to why the habeas corpus court erred by denying his petition for habeas corpus relief. Relevant to this appeal, the Petitioner claimed that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to convict or sentence him because the State never obtained an arrest warrant charging him with especially aggravated robbery. On May 9, 2017, the Trousdale County Circuit Court filed a brief written order denying the motion.

         II. Analysis

         On appeal, the Petitioner claims that the habeas corpus court erred by denying his petition for habeas corpus relief, maintaining that the trial court did not have jurisdiction to convict him of especially aggravated robbery or sentence him for the offense because he was arrested without a warrant. The State argues that the Petitioner has waived his claim because he did not provide an adequate record for our review and that, in any event, he is not entitled to relief. We agree with the State.

         The determination of whether to grant habeas corpus relief is a question of law. Summers v. State, 212 S.W.3d 251, 255 (Tenn. 2007). As such, we will review the trial court's findings de novo without a presumption of correctness. Id. Moreover, it is the petitioner's burden to demonstrate, by a preponderance of the evidence, "that the sentence is ...


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.