40-35-303(A). It Relied Upon The Reasoning In State v. Hicks, 848 S.W.2D 69 (Tenn.

• Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee
• Decided: September 13, 1995
• Docket: 02C01-9410-CR-00217
• Status: Published

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT JACKSON FILED FEBRUARY SESSION, 1995 September 13, 1995 STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) ) Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate Court Clerk Appellee, ) No. 02C01-9410-CR-00217 ) ) Shelby County v. ) ) Hon. Joseph B. McCartie, Judge ) MICHAEL RICHMOND, ) (Sentencing) ) Appellant. )

CONCURRING OPINION

I concur with the results reached in the majority opinion, but I question

the need for the analysis it makes. Unquestionably, a community corrections sentence

does not necessarily involve either probation or a suspended sentence. However,

although not raised by the parties, the real issue in this case is one that this court

recently resolved, relative to whether or not the Criminal Sentencing Reform Act of

1989 supersedes the sentencing provisions of T.C.A. § 55-10-616(c) so as to allow a

trial court to suspend all or part of a motor vehicle offender's sentence. In State v.

Ricky Fife, No. 03C01-9401-CR-00036, Blount Co. (Tenn. Crim. App. June 15, 1995),

this court held that the Reform Act supersedes the former provision and that all or part

of a motor vehicle offender's felony sentence could be suspended pursuant to T.C.A. §

40-35-303(a). It relied upon the reasoning in State v. Hicks, 848 S.W.2d 69 (Tenn.

Crim. App. 1992), in which this court reached a similar result relative to the offense of

driving on a revoked license. I agree with this court's position in Fife. Thus, both

probation and community correction sentences are available for the trial court's

consideration in this case.

_____________________________ Joseph M. Tipton, Judge