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. Burkhart

Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee, Knoxville

November 18, 2019

STATE OF TENNESSEE
v.
ANTONIO BURKHART, ALIAS ANTONIO MARKEZZEE BURKHART

          Session September 24, 2019

          Appeal from the Criminal Court for Knox County Nos. 110225, 113563 G. Scott Green, Judge

         In two consolidated cases, the Defendant pleaded guilty to three counts of violating the sex offender registry, reserving two certified questions of law pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 37(b)(2) regarding the validity of his original judgment and the validity of the reporting requirements. After review, we affirm the trial court's judgments.

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

          Darren V. Berg, Knoxville, Tennessee, for the appellant, Antonio Burkhart, Alias, Antonio Markezzee Burkhart.

          Herbert H. Slatery, III, Attorney General and Reporter; Courtney N. Orr, Assistant Attorney General; Charme P. Allen, District Attorney General; and Nathaniel R. Ogle, Assistant District Attorney General for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

          Robert W. Wedemeyer, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Thomas T. Woodall and Robert H. Montgomery, Jr., JJ., joined.

          OPINION

          ROBERT W. WEDEMEYER, JUDGE

         I. Facts

         This case arises from the Defendant's violating the sex offender registry on multiple occasions and pleading guilty to such offenses with the reservation of two certified questions of law regarding the validity of his juvenile adjudication for rape of a child and the legality of the sexual offender registry reporting requirements.

         In April 2017, the Knox County grand jury initially indicted the Defendant for two counts of violating the sexual offender registry by not disclosing that he had registered accounts with websites "Plenty of Fish" (Count 1); and "Youtube" (Count 2).

         In May 2017, the Defendant moved to dismiss the indictment. He contended that the court in the underlying juvenile delinquency adjudication used a standard of "clear and convincing evidence" rather than a beyond a reasonable doubt standard, as evidenced by the face of the order. The Defendant noted that he had been placed on the sexual offender registry as a result of his juvenile delinquency adjudication and had remained on the registry as an adult by operation of state law, which mandated that he could petition for removal from the registry on his twenty-fifth birthday. To the motion, the Defendant attached the order adjudicating him delinquent. The May 22, 2013 order stated that the juvenile court found "by clear and convincing evidence" that the Defendant committed a delinquent act and declared him an "unruly" child.

         The State filed a motion in the Knox County Juvenile Court requesting that it correct the clerical error regarding the standard of proof, which the juvenile court did, finding that "the use of the incorrect terms currently in the order is merely clerical error and oversight." The juvenile court then filed an amended order on July 20, 2017, changing the standard of proof to "beyond a reasonable doubt" and changing the term "unruly" to "delinquent." The State then responded to the motion to dismiss, contending that the legal basis for the Defendant's motion to dismiss was rendered moot. It further contended that the Defendant had been properly placed on ...


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.