Assigned on Briefs September 4, 2019
from the Circuit Court for Fayette County No. 13-CR-134 J.
Weber McCraw, Judge.
se Defendant, Jimmy Lee Pearce, Jr., appeals the Fayette
County Circuit Court's dismissal of his motion to correct
an illegal sentence pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal
Procedure 36.1. After review, we affirm the judgment of the
R. App. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Circuit Court
Lee Pearce, Jr., Somerville, Tennessee, Pro Se.
Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; Ronald
L. Coleman, Assistant Attorney General; Mark E. Davidson,
District Attorney General; and Falen Chandler, Assistant
District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of
E. Glenn, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which
Robert L. Holloway, Jr., and Timothy L. Easter, JJ., joined.
E. GLENN, JUDGE.
22, 2013, the Defendant was indicted for possession of more
than .5 grams of cocaine with intent to deliver, two counts
of assault, evading arrest, and resisting arrest. On December
2, 2013, he pled guilty to the lesser offense of possession
of less than .5 grams of cocaine with intent to deliver, and
to the other offenses as charged. That same day, the trial
court imposed an effective eight year sentence of probation,
to be served consecutively to the sentence from another
October 27, 2015, a violation of probation report was filed
against the Defendant, alleging that he had tested positive
for marijuana on three separate occasions. The Defendant
stipulated to the violation and was reinstated to probation.
On October 21, 2016, a second violation of probation report
was filed against the Defendant, alleging that he had been
charged with seven new offenses, failed to report, possessed
illegal substances, and posed a threat to society. On October
30, 2017, the trial court entered an order revoking the
January 30, 2019, the Defendant filed a motion to correct an
illegal sentence in which he alleged that the trial court
erred in revoking his probation because the probationary
period, which was ordered to be served consecutively to
another sentence, had not yet started. On January 31, 2019,
the trial court entered an order denying the Defendant's
motion on the ground that his sentence was not illegal.
Defendant argues that the trial court erred in denying his
motion to correct an illegal sentence, asserting that his
sentence is illegal because the trial court revoked a
probationary sentence which he had not yet begun to serve and
the revocation resulted in an effective sentence of