State of Tennessee v. Randy Joe McNew - Concurring

Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee

State of Tennessee v. Randy Joe McNew - Concurring

Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee·Decided October 13, 2009·No. E2008-02189-CCA-R3-CD·Published

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs July 28, 2009

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. RANDY JOE MCNEW

Appeal from the Criminal Court for Sullivan County No. S51,902 R. Jerry Beck, Judge

No. E2008-02189-CCA-R3-CD - Filed October 13, 2009

JOSEPH M. TIPTON , P.J., concurring.

I concur with the majority opinion. I believe, though, that the statement that the weight assigned to advisory enhancement and mitigating factors no longer has an appellate review provision should not preclude such an assessment relative to whether the sentence meets the principles and purposes of the Sentencing Act. That is, for example, using a five-year old conviction for speeding to enhance an aggravated burglary conviction to a maximum sentence may not meet the principles and purposes of the Sentencing Act because of inordinate weight given to the speeding conviction.

____________________________________ JOSEPH M. TIPTON, PRESIDING 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 KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs July 28, 2009

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. RANDY JOE MCNEW

Appeal from the Criminal Court for Sullivan County No. S51,902 R. Jerry Beck, Judge

No. E2008-02189-CCA-R3-CD - Filed October 13, 2009

JOSEPH M. TIPTON , P.J., concurring.

I concur with the majority opinion. I believe, though, that the statement that the weight assigned to advisory enhancement and mitigating factors no longer has an appellate review provision should not preclude such an assessment relative to whether the sentence meets the principles and purposes of the Sentencing Act. That is, for example, using a five-year old conviction for speeding to enhance an aggravated burglary conviction to a maximum sentence may not meet the principles and purposes of the Sentencing Act because of inordinate weight given to the speeding conviction.

____________________________________ JOSEPH M. TIPTON, PRESIDING JUDGE

State of Tennessee v. Randy Joe McNew - Concurring, (Tenn. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

State of Tennessee v. Randy Joe McNew - Concurring (State of Tennessee v. Randy Joe McNew - Concurring) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.