 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Adams12/20/1999
, 418 n. 2 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1997) (trial court properly found record of criminal activity to be extensive when defendant was arrested and/or convicted of at least twelve offenses, including felonies and misdemeanors).
Similarly, the evidence does not preponderate against the trial court's determination that the Defendant is a dangerous offender whose behavior indicates little or no regard for human life and no hesitation about committing a crime in which the risk to human life is high. In support of its determination, the trial court considered the nature of the crime, the Defendant's comments to Linda Lewis that he was going to kill her, the Defendant's comments to Christine Lewis that he should have killed her, and the comments heard by Tamika Rucker that next time he would kill Ms. Lewis or he should have killed her. The trial court also considered the disturbing letters and pictures sent to Ms. Lewis from jail, from which it can be inferred that the Defendant still wanted to harm or kill Ms. Lewis after being arrested. Finally, the trial court considered the Defendant's statement to Officer Gatwood that he stabbed his girlfriend because she was "sleeping with someone else" and he would do it again if he got the chance. This evidence greatly supports the finding that the Defendant has no hesitation about committing a crime where the risk to human life is high and that he has little or no regard for human life.
Though the Defendant clearly falls within the definition of "dangerous offender," our supreme court has held that before an offender may be sentenced to consecutive sentences based on a finding that the offender is dangerous, " he proof must also establish that the terms imposed are reasonably related to the severity of the offense committed and are necessary in order to protect the public from further criminal acts by the offender." State v. Wilkerson, 905 S.W.2d 933, 938 (Tenn. 1995). See also State v. David Keith Lane, No. 03-S-01-9802-CC-00013 (Tenn. Sept. 27, 1999) (holding Wilkerson factors apply only when sentencing pursuant to the dangerous offender category). The trial court found that the proof established these factors, and we agree. The Defendant broke into Ms. Lewis' home and tried to kill her. In the process of trying to kill Ms. Lewis, he assaulted Ms. Lewis' mother and daughter with a knife. He repeatedly stated that he either would kill Ms. Lewis or that he should have killed her. He told an officer that he would do it again. He sent Ms. Lewis disturbing letters and pictures from jail, indicating that he wanted to kill Ms. Lewis. Dr. Schleicher testified that the Defendant still has the same type of impulsive personality. He has refused any type of treatment for his mental condition. It was thus appropriate for the trial court to impose consecutive sentences because the Defendant is a dangerous offender and consecutive sentences are both reasonably related to the severity of the offense and necessary to protect the public from further criminal activity.
IV.
In his last issue, the Defendant argues that the trial court erred in refusing to transfer this case to another criminal court of competent jurisdiction. Before trial, counsel for the defense moved the trial court for "traditional docketing" of the Defendant's case so as to avoid the appearance of impropriety and the appearance of forum shopping. After a hearing, the trial judge denied the motion, finding no evidence of prosecutorial misconduct and stating that the Defendant would get a fair trial in her court because she had no knowledge about the case and would make all decisions based on the facts and the law.
The evidence presented at the hearing revealed that under "tradit
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Tennessee Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|