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. Caudle

Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee, Nashville

November 12, 2019

STATE OF TENNESSEE
v.
MICHAEL L. CAUDLE

          Assigned on Briefs August 21, 2019

          Appeal from the Circuit Court for Montgomery County No. 2014-CR-1071 William R. Goodman, III, Judge

         In this delayed appeal, the Defendant, Michael L. Caudle, appeals his convictions for two counts of the sale of less than 0.5 grams of cocaine within a drug-free school zone, two counts of the delivery of less than 0.5 grams of cocaine within a drug-free school zone, and one count of possession of 0.5 grams or more of cocaine within a drug-free school zone with the intent to manufacture, sell, or deliver, for which he received an effective sixty-year sentence as a career offender. On appeal, the Defendant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions. We conclude that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to grant the delayed appeal. Therefore, we dismiss the delayed appeal.

         Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Appeal Dismissed

          Gregory D. Smith (on appeal) and Cleveland Turner (at trial), Clarksville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Michael L. Caudle.

          Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; Sophia S. Lee, Senior Assistant Attorney General; John W. Carney, Jr., District Attorney General; and Dan Brollier, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

          John Everett Williams, P.J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which James Curwood Witt, Jr., and Robert H. Montgomery, Jr., JJ., joined.

          OPINION

          JOHN EVERETT WILLIAMS, PRESIDING JUDGE

         FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

         The evidence presented at trial established that on December 20, 2013, the Defendant sold 0.47 grams of cocaine to a confidential informant for the Clarksville Police Department during a controlled buy and in a parking lot located within 1, 000 feet of a school. Following the transaction, officers followed the Defendant's vehicle to the parking lot of a convenience store located within 1, 000 feet of a school. The Defendant then sold 0.16 grams of cocaine to a woman who previously had served as a confidential informant but was not acting in that capacity at the time of the drug transaction. Officers arrested the Defendant in the parking lot of the convenience store and searched the Defendant's vehicle, locating a baggie containing 2.35 grams of cocaine.

         Following a trial in January 2017, the jury convicted the Defendant of two counts of the sale of less than 0.5 grams of cocaine within a drug-free school zone, two counts of the delivery of less than 0.5 grams of cocaine within a drug-free school zone, and one count of possession of 0.5 grams or more of cocaine in a drug-free school zone with the intent to manufacture, sell, or deliver. Following a sentencing hearing on June 2, 2017, the trial court merged the delivery convictions into the sale convictions and ordered the Defendant to serve an effective sixty-year sentence as a career offender.

         At the conclusion of the sentencing hearing, the trial court allowed trial counsel to withdraw and appointed appellate counsel to represent the Defendant. The trial court set the Defendant's case for a status hearing on June 19th, and the prosecutor stated that he would send appellate counsel an email to inform him of the appointment. The record does not reflect what occurred during the status hearing, and an order appointing appellate counsel was not filed until October 12, 2017.

         Meanwhile, the trial court signed the judgments June 2nd, and the trial court clerk's office entered the judgments on June 23, 2017. The Defendant did not file a motion for new trial or a notice of appeal. On August 17th, the trial court clerk filed a letter from the Defendant in which he asked about the status of his direct appeal and whether new counsel had been appointed to represent him. The Defendant attached a letter from trial counsel dated June 6th in which he advised the Defendant that he had thirty days from the date of the sentencing hearing in which to appeal. Trial counsel stated that he would not be seeking an appeal on the Defendant's behalf because the sentencing hearing "concluded my representation of you in this matter."

         On October 20, 2017, approximately four months after the judgments had been filed, the trial court entered an "Order Granting Delayed Appeal," stating that the matter came before the trial court on October 12th regarding the Defendant's pro se ...


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.