Danny J. Cole v. State

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee
DecidedAugust 15, 1997
Docket01C01-9608-CR-00333
StatusPublished

This text of Danny J. Cole v. State (Danny J. Cole 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.

Bluebook
Danny J. Cole v. State, (Tenn. Ct. App. 1997).

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT NASHVILLE FILED JUNE 1997 SESSION August 15, 1997

Cecil W. Crowson Appellate Court Clerk DANNY JOE COLE, ) ) APPELLANT, ) ) No. 01-C-01-9608-CR-00333 ) ) Davidson County v. ) ) J. Randall Wyatt, Jr., Judge ) ) (Habeas Corpus) RICKY BELL, Warden, ) ) APPELLEE. )

FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE:

Geoffrey Coston John Knox Walkup Attorney at Law Attorney General & Reporter 2813 West End Avenue 500 Charlotte Avenue Nashville, TN 37203 Nashville, TN 37243-0497

Daryl J. Brand Assistant Attorney General 450 James Robertson Parkway Nashville, TN 37243-0493

Victor S. Johnson, III District Attorney General Washington Square, Suite 500 222 Second Avenue, North Nashville, TN 37201-1649

Katrin N. Miller Assistant District Attorney General Washington Square, Suite 500 222 Second Avenue, North Nashville, TN 37201-1649

OPINION FILED:________________________________

AFFIRMED PURSUANT TO RULE 20

Joe B. Jones, Presiding Judge OPINION

The appellant, Danny Joe Cole (petitioner), appeals as of right from a judgment of

the trial court dismissing his suit for the writ of habeas corpus. While the trial court

addressed the merits of the grounds set forth in the petition, the court concluded the

judgment was at best voidable, not void, and the remedy of habeas corpus was not

available to the petitioner to attack the sentences previously imposed. In this Court, the

petitioner contends the Tennessee Criminal Sentencing Reform Act of 1989 violates Article

II, Section 2, the Separation of Powers Clause, of the Tennessee Constitution; and the Act

is inconsistent with the determinate sentencing provisions contained in the Act.

After a thorough review of the record, the briefs submitted by the parties, and the

law governing the issues presented for review, it is the opinion of this Court that the

judgment of the trial court should be affirmed pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Tennessee

Court of Criminal Appeals.

_____________________________________________ JOE B. JONES, PRESIDING JUDGE

CONCUR:

______________________________________ WILLIAM M. BARKER, JUDGE

______________________________________ THOMAS T. WOODALL, JUDGE

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Danny J. Cole v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/danny-j-cole-v-state-tenncrimapp-1997.