State of Tennessee v. Ernest Edward Wilson - Concurring and Dissenting

Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee

State of Tennessee v. Ernest Edward Wilson - Concurring and Dissenting

Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee·Decided October 17, 2001·No. M2000-01997-CCA-R3-CD·Published

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE August 14, 2001 Session

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. ERNEST EDWARD WILSON

Direct Appeal from the Criminal Court for Davidson County NO . 98-D-2474

NO . M2000-01997-CCA-R3-CD - FILED OCTOBER 17, 2001

James Curwood Witt, Jr., J., concurring and dissenting.

Although I agree with Judge Welles that it is problematic to use voluntary manslaughter as the intermediate offense for the purposes of applying the Williams harmless error rule, I concur with Judge Riley in affirming the conviction, based on the facts of the present case and the defendant’s use of those facts in formulating a theory of defense. Given the facts, the defendant’s theory of defense, and the jury’s verdict of second-degree murder, I conclude that the failure to charge the included offenses lesser than voluntary manslaughter was harmless error.

___________________________________ James Curwood Witt, Jr., Judge

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

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE August 14, 2001 Session

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. ERNEST EDWARD WILSON

Direct Appeal from the Criminal Court for Davidson County NO . 98-D-2474

NO . M2000-01997-CCA-R3-CD - FILED OCTOBER 17, 2001

James Curwood Witt, Jr., J., concurring and dissenting.

Although I agree with Judge Welles that it is problematic to use voluntary manslaughter as the intermediate offense for the purposes of applying the Williams harmless error rule, I concur with Judge Riley in affirming the conviction, based on the facts of the present case and the defendant’s use of those facts in formulating a theory of defense. Given the facts, the defendant’s theory of defense, and the jury’s verdict of second-degree murder, I conclude that the failure to charge the included offenses lesser than voluntary manslaughter was harmless error.

___________________________________ James Curwood Witt, Jr., Judge

State of Tennessee v. Ernest Edward Wilson - Concurring and Dissenting, (Tenn. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

State of Tennessee v. Ernest Edward Wilson - Concurring and Dissenting (State of Tennessee v. Ernest Edward Wilson - Concurring and Dissenting) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.