You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

State of Tennessee v. Darius Jones

Citation: Not availableDocket: W2008-00101-CCA-R3-CD

Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee; June 16, 2009; Tennessee; State Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

Narrative Opinion Summary

In this appellate case, the defendant was initially convicted of first-degree felony murder and several counts of aggravated robbery, resulting in a life sentence plus eighty-one years. Upon the first appeal, the appellate court affirmed the felony murder conviction and life sentence but remanded the case to the trial court for resentencing on the other convictions, due to Blakely v. Washington requiring specific findings for consecutive sentencing. The trial court subsequently imposed minimum sentences without conducting the necessary hearing or making the mandated findings, prompting a second remand. The appellate court mandated the inclusion of the presentence report, which was absent in both appeals, to ensure proper sentencing review. Despite the defendant's challenge to the consecutive sentencing scheme based on Apprendi v. New Jersey, the appellate court noted its lack of authority to overturn established supreme court precedent, specifically State v. Allen. The case was remanded again to the trial court for compliance with the requirement to make specific findings justifying consecutive sentencing.

Legal Issues Addressed

Authority of Appellate Courts in Overruling Precedent

Application: The appellate court highlighted its lack of authority to overrule supreme court decisions, specifically regarding the Sixth Amendment challenges.

Reasoning: Additionally, the defendant contended that Tennessee’s consecutive sentencing scheme violates the Sixth Amendment based on Apprendi v. New Jersey, and argued for the overruling of State v. Allen, but the court stated it lacks authority to overturn supreme court decisions.

Reconsideration of Sentences under Blakely v. Washington

Application: The trial court must provide specific findings to justify consecutive sentencing after the initial remand due to Blakely v. Washington.

Reasoning: On direct appeal, the court upheld the felony murder conviction and life sentence but remanded for resentencing on the other convictions due to Blakely v. Washington, requiring the trial court to address consecutive sentencing with specific findings.

Requirement of Presentence Report in Sentencing Appeals

Application: The appellate court mandated the inclusion of the presentence report in the record to ensure proper review of sentencing decisions.

Reasoning: The appellate court noted that the presentence report was absent from the record during both the initial appeal and the current appeal, and ordered it to be included.