State of Tennessee v. Charlene Hardison - Concurring/Dissenting

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT NASHVILLE

APRIL 1998 SESSION FILED August 7, 1998

STATE OF TE NNE SSE E, ) Cecil W. Crowson C.C.A. NO. 01C01-9705-CC-00196 ) Appellate Court Clerk Appellee, ) ) WILLIAMSON COUNTY V. ) ) ) HON . HEN RY D ENM ARK B ELL, CHARLENE HARDISON, ) JUDGE ) Appe llant. ) (SENT ENCIN G)

SEPARATE OPINION CONCURRING IN PART AND DISSENTING IN PART

I conc ur with a ll portions o f Judge Lafferty’s op inion with the exception

of the portion that reduces the period of confinem ent from six (6) mo nths to ninety

(90) days. I might agree with that ultimate result after a specific finding of facts by

the trial court following the dictate s of the Ten nessee C riminal Senten cing Reform

Act of 1989. However, it is my opinion that the more appro priate d ispos ition of th is

particular case is to remand it back to the trial court for a new sentencing hearing

which follows the specific req uireme nts of the A ct. See State v. Ervin, 939 S.W.2d

581, 584-85 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1996) and cases cited therein.

____________________________________ THOMAS T. W OODALL, Judge