State v. Freddy Carrell

• Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee
• Decided: December 1, 2010
• Docket: 03C01-9807-CC-00258
• Status: Published

Opinion

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE FILED AT KNOXVILLE August 9, 1999

Cecil Crowson, Jr. MAY 1999 SESSION Appellate C ourt Clerk

STATE OF TENNESSEE, * C.C.A. # 03C01-9807-CC-00258

Appellee, * Blount County

VS. * Honorable D. Kelly Thomas, Jr., Judge

FREDDIE CARRELL, * (Probation Revocation)

Appellant. *

FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE:

JULIE A. MARTIN PAUL G. SUMMERS P.O. Box 426 Attorney General & Reporter Knoxville, TN 37901-0426 GEORGIA BLYTHE FELNER RAYMOND MACK GARNER Counsel for the State District Public Defender 425 Fifth Avenue North 419 High Street Nashville, TN 37243-0493 Maryville, TN 37804 MICHAEL L. FLYNN District Attorney General

PHILIP H. MORTON Assistant District Attorney General 363 Court Street Maryville, TN 37804-5906

OPINION FILED: _______________

AFFIRMED - RULE 20

JOHN EVERETT WILLIAMS, Judge OPINION

The defendant, Freddie Carrell, appeals the revocation of his probation,

arguing that the trial court abused its discretion. We AFFIRM the judgment of

the trial court.

On February 9, 1994, the defendant pleaded guilty to two felony drug

offenses. On May 6, 1997, the trial court sentenced him to two years probation

for each offense, with the sentences to run concurrently. Shortly thereafter, the

defendant admitted to numerous violations of his probation. The trial court

revoked his probation and ordered that he serve the remainder of his sentence in

jail. Nevertheless, the defendant was released from jail and returned to

probation on April 17, 1998.

Following his release, the defendant requested that his probation be

transferred to Florida, and he moved there. Approximately six weeks later, the

defendant requested that he be transferred back to Tennessee. The defendant

failed to report to his probation officer as scheduled upon returning to Tennessee

and failed to attend two subsequent meetings. As a result, a probation violation

warrant was filed on June 17, 1998. Following a hearing, the trial court found

that the defendant had violated the terms of his probation by not reporting and

ordered that the defendant serve the remainder of his sentences in the

Tennessee Department of Correction.

The defendant admits violating the terms of his probation. However, due

to car problems and other circumstances, he argues that he did the best that he

could.

The decision whether to revoke a defendant’s probation is vested in the

discretion of the trial court. See State v. Leach, 914 S.W.2d 104, 106 (Tenn.

-2- Crim. App. 1995). This Court will not disturb a trial court’s judgment relative to

probation revocation proceedings absent an abuse of that discretion. See id.

For this Court to find that the trial court abused its discretion, it must be

established that the record contains no substantial evidence in support of the

trial court’s conclusion. See State v. Harkins, 811 S.W.2d 79, 82 (1991). Such

is not the case here.

The evidence supports the findings of the trial court, and we find no error

of law mandating reversal. Therefore, pursuant to Rule 20 of the Court of

Criminal Appeals, we AFFIRM the judgment of the trial court.

_____________________________ JOHN EVERETT W ILLIAMS, Judge

CONCUR:

_______________________________ JAMES CURWOOD WITT, JR., Judge

________________________________ ALAN E. GLENN, Judge

-3-