State v. Slaughter
This text of State v. Slaughter (State v. Slaughter) 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 FEBRUARY 1998 SESSION June 2, 1998
Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate C ourt Clerk STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) C.C.A. NO. 03C01-9705-CC-00190 ) Appellee, ) BLOUNT COUNTY ) VS. ) No. C-9610 Below ) BILLY SLAUGHTER, ) HON. PHYLLIS MILLER, ) JUDGE BY INTERCHANGE Appellant. )
ORDER
The defendant, Billy Slaughter, was convicted by a Blount County jury of
reckless endangerment with a deadly weapon, a Class E felony. The trial court
sentenced him as a Range I offender to one (1) year, with all but ten (10) days
suspended, and ordered that defendant serve two (2) years on probation. On
appeal, defendant contends that the trial court erred in denying full probation. We
find no error and affirm the judgment of the trial court pursuant to Rule 20 of the
Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals.
I
Defendant was driving to his mother’s home when his vehicle slid into a ditch
due to snow and ice on the ground. A companion and the victim, Timothy Self,
stopped to give assistance. After Self and his companion pulled defendant’s vehicle
out of the ditch and onto the road, defendant’s vehicle slipped on the ice and drifted
into a telephone pole, causing damage to the vehicle. An argument ensued, and
defendant hit Self with a “bumper jack,” breaking Self’s arm.1 At trial, defendant
claimed that Self brandished a gun, and he was merely defending himself.
1 The victim raised his arm above his head in order to shield himself from defendant’s blows. Defendant was charged with aggravated assault, but the jury convicted him of the
lesser offense of felony reckless endangerment.
At the sentencing hearing, defendant testified that he was twenty-four (24)
years old, was married and had a four-year old son. He never completed high
school or obtained his GED. He worked part-time doing repair work at a tennis
court facility. He reported occasional alcohol use and had used marijuana in the
past. He maintained that the victim had a weapon during the altercation.
The trial court sentenced defendant as a Range I offender to one (1) year.
In determining whether an alternative sentence would be appropriate, the trial court
noted defendant’s poor social and work history. The court found that defendant was
less than candid in his insistence that the victim was carrying a gun. Furthermore,
the trial court determined that a period of incarceration was necessary to avoid
depreciating the seriousness of the offense. Therefore, the trial court suspended
defendant’s sentence, with the exception of ten (10) days, and ordered that
defendant serve two (2) years on supervised probation. From the trial court’s
judgment, defendant brings this appeal.
II
We agree with the trial court that a period of incarceration is necessary to
avoid depreciating the seriousness of the offense. During a verbal argument,
defendant struck the victim with a “bummer jack,” breaking the victim’s arm. The
victim’s injuries could have been much more serious, possibly resulting in death,
had he not lifted his arm above his head in self-defense. Furthermore, the trial court
found that defendant was not truthful in his claims that the victim was carrying a
gun. Lack of candor is an appropriate consideration for the trial court and reflects
on a defendant's potential for rehabilitation. State v. Dowdy, 894 S.W.2d 301, 306
(Tenn. Crim. App. 1994).
Considering the nature of the offense and the defendant’s negative
rehabilitation potential, we find that the period of incarceration of ten (10) days in the
2 county jail is appropriate. It is, therefore, ORDERED that the judgment of the trial
court is affirmed in accordance with Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal
Appeals.
In the event the defendant indicates an intention to file an application for
permission to appeal to the Tennessee Supreme Court, he may be admitted to bail
in the additional amount of $2,500, for a total bond amount of $5,000, with sufficient
sureties to be approved by the clerk of the trial court pending filing and disposition
of said application. In default of such bond, he shall be remanded to the custody
of the Sheriff of Blount County. Costs of appeal will be paid by the State of
Tennessee as it appears defendant is indigent.
JERRY L. SMITH, JUDGE
CONCUR:
THOMAS T. WOODALL, JUDGE
WILLIAM B. ACREE, JR., SPECIAL JUDGE
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
State v. Slaughter, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-slaughter-tenncrimapp-2010.