State of Tennessee v. Susan Renee Bise - Concurring

Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee

State of Tennessee v. Susan Renee Bise - Concurring

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee

DecidedSeptember 15, 2011

DocketE2011-00005-CCA-R3-CD

StatusPublished

This text of State of Tennessee v. Susan Renee Bise - Concurring (State of Tennessee v. Susan Renee Bise - Concurring) 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

State of Tennessee v. Susan Renee Bise - Concurring, (Tenn. Ct. App. 2011).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on Briefs August 30, 2011

STATE OF TENNESSEE V. SUSAN RENEE BISE

Direct Appeal from the Criminal Court for Greene County No. 09-CR-353 John F. Dugger, Jr., Judge

No. E2011-00005-CCA-R3-CD - Filed September 15, 2011

J OHN E VERETT W ILLIAMS, J., concurring in results only.

Judge Glenn, Judge Woodall, and I all agree that the trial court inappropriately applied a single enhancement factor when considering the defendant’s sentence. I write separately because each of us has different opinions as to what process should be used in determining the end result in circumstances in which the trial court inappropriately applied a single enhancing factor. Because I believe the trial judge is “closer to the case,” I would prefer to remand this case to the trial court for resentencing. I do not have that option as a result of my other two colleagues’ decisions. Therefore, with the trial court not having a presumption of correctness, I have reviewed the case de novo and, after giving consideration to the principles of sentencing, have concluded that the defendant’s appropriate sentence is two years. The result that I reached is the same reached by Judge Glenn’s opinion announcing the decision of the court. However, I think Judge Woodall has expressed appropriate concerns about the language contained in that opinion.

_________________________________ JOHN EVERETT WILLIAMS, 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 August 30, 2011

STATE OF TENNESSEE V. SUSAN RENEE BISE

Direct Appeal from the Criminal Court for Greene County No. 09-CR-353 John F. Dugger, Jr., Judge

No. E2011-00005-CCA-R3-CD - Filed September 15, 2011

J OHN E VERETT W ILLIAMS, J., concurring in results only.

Judge Glenn, Judge Woodall, and I all agree that the trial court inappropriately applied a single enhancement factor when considering the defendant’s sentence. I write separately because each of us has different opinions as to what process should be used in determining the end result in circumstances in which the trial court inappropriately applied a single enhancing factor. Because I believe the trial judge is “closer to the case,” I would prefer to remand this case to the trial court for resentencing. I do not have that option as a result of my other two colleagues’ decisions. Therefore, with the trial court not having a presumption of correctness, I have reviewed the case de novo and, after giving consideration to the principles of sentencing, have concluded that the defendant’s appropriate sentence is two years. The result that I reached is the same reached by Judge Glenn’s opinion announcing the decision of the court. However, I think Judge Woodall has expressed appropriate concerns about the language contained in that opinion.

_________________________________ JOHN EVERETT WILLIAMS, JUDGE

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

State of Tennessee v. Susan Renee Bise - Concurring, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-of-tennessee-v-susan-renee-bise-concurring-tenncrimapp-2011.