Billy Joe Sisk v. State
This text of Billy Joe Sisk v. State (Billy Joe Sisk v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE FILED AT KNOXVILLE August 12, 1999
Cecil Crowson, Jr. JUNE 1999 SESSION Appellate C ourt Clerk
BILLY JOE SISK, * C.C.A. # 03C01-9807-CC-00256
Appellant, * COCKE COUNTY
VS. * Honorable Ben W. Hooper II, Judge
STATE OF TENNESSEE, * (Post-Conviction)
Appellee. *
FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE:
SUSANNA LAWS-THOMAS PAUL G. SUMMERS Assistant Public Defender Attorney General & Reporter 102 Mims Avenue Newport, TN 37821-3614 TODD R. KELLEY Assistant Attorney General 425 Fifth Avenue North Nashville, TN 37243-0493
AL C. SCHMUTZER, JR. District Attorney General
JAMES BRUCE DUNN Assistant District Attorney General 339-A East Main Street Newport, TN 37821
OPINION FILED: _______________
AFFIRMED - RULE 20
JOHN EVERETT WILLIAMS, Judge OPINION
Billy Joe Sisk appeals from a judgment of the Circuit Court of Cocke
County dismissing his petition for post-conviction relief. The petitioner was
convicted of aggravated assault and second degree murder and was sentenced
to concurrent terms of three and eighteen years respectively. This Court
affirmed his convictions and sentences on direct appeal. See State v. Billy Joe
Sisk, Cocke County, No. 03C01-9410-CR-00367 (Tenn. Crim. App. filed January
17, 1997, at Knoxville).
On June 23, 1997, the petitioner filed a pro se motion for post-conviction
relief, alleging that his trial counsel was ineffective. The trial court granted an
evidentiary hearing and, finding no merit to the petitioners allegations, dismissed
the petition.
After carefully reviewing the record and arguments of counsel, we
conclude that the evidence does not preponderate against the findings of the trial
court, and we find no error of law mandating reversal. Therefore, pursuant to
Rule 20 of the Court of Criminal Appeals, we AFFIRM the judgment of the trial
court.
_____________________________ JOHN EVERETT W ILLIAMS, Judge
CONCUR:
____________________________ JOHN H. PEAY, Judge
_____________________________ DAVID G. HAYES, Judge
-2-
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Billy Joe Sisk v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/billy-joe-sisk-v-state-tenncrimapp-1999.