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. Bowley

Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee, Nashville

July 12, 2019

STATE OF TENNESSEE
v.
EMMANUEL DESHAWN BOWLEY

          Session: March 20, 2019

          Appeal from the Circuit Court for Montgomery County No. 63CC1-2016-CR-384 Jill Bartee Ayers, Judge.

         A Montgomery County jury convicted the Defendant, Emmanuel Deshawn Bowley, of conspiracy to distribute more than 300 grams of cocaine, possession of more than 300 grams of cocaine with the intent to sell, simple possession of marijuana, attempted possession of a deadly weapon during the commission of a dangerous felony, and attempted possession of illegal drug paraphernalia. The trial court ordered that the Defendant serve an effective sentence of sixteen years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. On appeal, the Defendant asserts that: (1) the trial court improperly denied his motion to sever; (2) the trial court erred when it denied his motion to suppress based on an invalid wiretap; (3) the trial court erred when it admitted evidence seized from a co-defendant; and (4) the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions. After a thorough review of the record and applicable law, we affirm the trial court's judgments.

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

          Brian E. Price, Clarksville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Emmanuel Deshawn Bowley.

          Herbert H. Slatery, III, Attorney General and Reporter; M. Todd Ridley, Assistant Attorney General; John W. Carney, Jr., District Attorney General; and Chris W. Dotson, Assistant District Attorney General for the Appellee, State of Tennessee.

          Robert W. Wedemeyer, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Norma McGee Ogle and J. Ross Dyer, JJ., joined.

          OPINION

          Robert W. Wedemeyer, Judge.

         I. Background and Facts

         This case arises from a wiretap investigation that revealed the Defendant's sale and delivery of large amounts of cocaine and marijuana to his co-defendants. Based on this information, law enforcement searched the Defendant's residence wherein they discovered cocaine, marijuana, and a firearm. Based on this evidence, a Montgomery County grand jury indicted the Defendant, as part of a 40-count indictment, for: conspiracy to distribute more than 300 grams of cocaine (Count 1); conspiracy to distribute more than 70 pounds of marijuana (Count 2); money laundering (Count 3); possession of more than 300 grams of cocaine with intent to sell (Count 11); possession of more than a half ounce of marijuana with intent to sell (Count 12); possession of a firearm during the commission of a dangerous felony (Count 13); and possession of drug paraphernalia (Count 16).[1]

         A. Motion to Sever

         Prior to trial, the Defendant filed a motion to sever his trial from his co-defendants, which was unopposed by the State and granted by the trial court. The Defendant also filed a motion for severance of the offenses, which was heard on June 5, 2017. A transcript of the hearing is not included in the record. The trial court granted the motion to sever as to Count 3, money laundering, but, in an order, found that the remaining indicted offenses "can constitute a common scheme or plan" and that "the evidence of those offenses would be relevant to each other[.]" The trial court further found that the probative value of that evidence, presented at one trial, outweighed the potential risk of unfair prejudice to the Defendant.

         B. Motion to Suppress

         The Defendant subsequently filed a motion to suppress statements made by the Defendant to Agent Will Evans of the Clarksville Police Department during the search of his residence. He contended that he had made an "unambiguous request" for an attorney in response to his Miranda rights being recited to him. He contended that he was subject to an unlawful custodial interrogation and that his statements should be suppressed. The Defendant filed a second motion to suppress evidence obtained from a wiretap of the Defendant's cell phones, pursuant to what he contended was an invalid application for a wiretap on the bases that it did not properly identify the authorizing District Attorney General and because it lacked probable cause. The State responded that the application properly identified the authorizing District Attorney and that probable cause had been sufficiently established. A hearing was held, also on June 5, 2017, according to the technical record. A transcript of this hearing is not included in the record. In an ...


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.