State of Tennessee v. Rochelle Andre Triplett

• Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee
• Decided: February 2, 2000
• Docket: W1999-01749-CCA-R3-CD
• Status: Published

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT JACKSON

JANUARY 2000 SESSION FILED February 2, 2000

STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) Cecil Crowson, Jr. ) Appellate Court Clerk NO. W1999-01749-CCA-R3-CD Appellee, ) ) MADISON COUNTY VS. ) ) HON. ROY B. MORGAN, JR., ROCHELLE ANDRE TRIPLETT, ) JUDGE ) Appellant. ) (Probation Revocation)

FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE:

CLIFFORD K. McGOWN PAUL G. SUMMERS 113 North Court Square, Suite 204 Attorney General and Reporter P.O. Box 26 Waverly, TN 37185-0026 MARK E. DAVIDSON (On Appeal Only) Assistant Attorney General Cordell Hull Building, 2nd Floor GEORGE MORTON GOOGE 425 Fifth Avenue North District Public Defender Nashville, TN 37243-0493 STEPHEN P. SPRACHER JAMES G. (JERRY) WOODALL Assistant Public Defender District Attorney General 227 West Baltimore Street Jackson, TN 38301-6137 SHAUN A. BROWN (At Trial and Of Counsel On Appeal) Assistant District Attorney General 225 Martin Luther King Drive P.O. Box 2825 Jackson, TN 38302-2825

OPINION FILED:

AFFIRMED - RULE 20 ORDER

JOE G. RILEY, JUDGE ORDER

Appellant, Rochelle Andre Triplett, pled guilty to aggravated assault, simple assault, criminal impersonation, and possession of drug paraphernalia in March

1998. He received an effective three-year sentence and was placed on probation. In June 1998, his probation officer filed a probation violation warrant alleging failure to report and failure to pay fines and costs. The trial court conducted a full

revocation hearing, found appellant in violation and revoked his probation. Appellant challenges that revocation. We AFFIRM.

At the May 1999 revocation hearing, the state asserted two additional grounds for revocation through the testimony of defendant’s probation officer:

violation of curfew and failure to inform of change of residence. Defendant also testified at the hearing. He stipulated to his failure to report and pay fines, but challenged the two additional grounds.

Based upon the stipulations and testimony, the trial court found that the

appellant failed to report, failed to inform his probation officer of a change in

residence and failed to pay his fines and costs. The trial court rejected the state’s contention that defendant violated his curfew. The evidence does not preponderate against the trial court’s ruling. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by revoking

appellant’s probation. Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-311(d).

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed pursuant to Rule 20, Tennessee

Court of Criminal Appeals. It appearing that the appellant is indigent, costs shall be taxed to the state.

So ordered. Enter:

_______________________ JOE G. RILEY, JUDGE

2 CONCUR:

____________________________ JOHN EVERETT WILLIAMS, JUDGE

____________________________ ALAN E. GLENN, JUDGE