State v. Shropshire
This text of State v. Shropshire (State v. Shropshire) 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.
Opinion
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE
AT KNOXVILLE FILED APRIL 1997 SESSION January 26, 1998
Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate C ourt Clerk STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) C.C.A. No. 03C01-9612-CR-00454 ) Appellant, ) KNOX COUNTY ) VS. ) HON. RICHARD BAUMGARTNER, ) JUDGE JAMES DAVID SHROPSHIRE, ) (Assault, Aggravated Sexual Battery) ) Appellee. )
FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE:
JOHN KNOX WALKUP KENNETH F. IRVINE, JR. Attorney General and Reporter 550 Main Avenue Chattanooga, TN 37402 NationsBank Center Suite 775 MICHAEL J. FAHEY, II Knoxville, TN 37901 Assistant Attorney General 450 James Robertson Parkway Nashville, TN 37243-0493
RANDALL E. NICHOLS District Attorney General
WILLIAM H. CRABTREE CHARME JOHNSON Assistant District Attorney General City-County Building Knoxville, TN 37902
OPINION FILED:
REVERSED AND REMANDED
CHRIS CRAFT, SPECIAL JUDGE OPINION
The State of Tennessee appeals from the decision of the trial judge
dismissing convictions for assault and aggravated sexual battery due to insufficiency
of the presentment. We reverse, reinstate the convictions and remand for further
proceedings.
Appellee, James David Shropshire, was tried in September, 1995 on a three
count presentment for Rape of a Child (Count I) and Aggravated Sexual Battery
(Counts II and III). He was acquitted of Count II and the jury deadlocked on Counts
I and III. Upon retrial in March 1996, Mr. Shropshire was convicted of assault as
included in Count I and Aggravated Sexual Battery as charged in Count III. Prior to a
hearing on the Motion for New Trial, the trial judge dismissed the convictions due to
the release of State v. Roger Dale Hill, No. 01C01-9508-CC-00267 (Tenn. Crim. App.,
Nashville, June 20, 1996), because the presentment failed to allege a culpable mental
state, an essential element of each offense. The Tennessee Supreme Court has since
reversed the holding of the Court of Criminal Appeals in Hill, holding instead that the
required mental state may be inferred from the nature of the criminal conduct alleged,
and does not have to be alleged in the charging instrument. State v. Roger Dale Hill,
No. 01-S-01-9701-CC-00005 (Jackson, November 3, 1997).
Having examined Counts I and III and found them sufficient to provide adequate
notice to both the defendant and the trial court of each offenses alleged, we therefore
find that the dismissal of the presentment was not proper, reinstate the convictions,
and remand to the trial court for a hearing on the Motion for New Trial and any further
required proceedings.
The judgment of the trial court is REVERSED AND REMANDED.
CHRIS CRAFT, SPECIAL JUDGE
2 CONCUR:
JERRY L. SMITH, JUDGE
JOE RILEY, JUDGE
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
State v. Shropshire, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-shropshire-tenncrimapp-1998.