State of Tennessee v. Jordan Hill

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT JACKSON

Assigned on Briefs December 6, 2005

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JORDAN HILL

Appeal from the Criminal Court for Madison County

No. 03-00007 Joseph B. Dailey, Judge

No. W2005-00248-CCA-R3-CD - Filed December 16, 2005

The Defendant, Jordan Hill, was convicted of attempted aggravated robbery and of being a felon in

the possession of a handgun. On appeal, he contends that the evidence is insufficient to sustain these

convictions. Finding no reversible error, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgments of the Criminal Court Affirmed

ROBERT W. WEDEMEYER , J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which THOMAS T. WOODALL and

ALAN E. GLENN , JJ., joined.

Garland Ergüden, Memphis, Tennessee, for the Appellant, Jordan Hill.

Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Renee W. Turner, Assistant Attorney General;

William L. Gibbons, District Attorney General; Greg Gilbert, Assistant District Attorney General,

for the Appellee, State of Tennessee.

OPINION

I. Facts

This case arises out of an attempted aggravated robbery that occurred on March 23, 2002.

For this crime, the Defendant was indicted by a Shelby County Grand Jury on one count of attempted

aggravated robbery and one count of being a convicted felon in possession of a handgun. At the

Defendant’s trial, the following evidence was presented: Terry Thomas testified that, on March 23,

2002, at 8:00 or 8:30 a.m. he was at a store called Lou’s market. He said that he used the phone, and,

as he was returning from using the phone, he heard someone calling him by his nickname, “Red.”

He said that he looked around, and the he saw the Defendant “run up on him.” Thomas testified that

the Defendant then pulled out a gun and said, “B****, give me your money” while sticking his hand

1

in Thomas’ pocket. Thomas “snatched” the Defendant’s hand out of his pocket and opened the door

to his car. As he was getting in the car, the Defendant hit him on the bridge of his nose with the gun,

breaking his nose. Thomas described the gun as silver and gray and said the gun was “two-toned.”

He guessed that the gun was an automatic that was either a nine millimeter of forty caliber Glock.

Thomas said that the Defendant never got his wallet.

Thomas said that, after the Defendant hit him in he nose with his gun, the Defendant ran and

jumped into another car that was a small light brown or gray four-door sedan, like a Chevy Malibu

or a Taurus. Thomas said that a woman, Annie Smith, was in his car when he jumped in, and she

spotted the police a short distance away. He said that they went to the police and reported what had

happened, and the police called an ambulance and treated his nose. Thomas said that he followed

the police when they attempted to find the Defendant, and Smith spotted the Defendant standing near

his car on a side street. He said that he caught up with the police and told them that he had spotted

the Defendant, and they went back to where the Defendant had seen. By the time they got there, the

Defendant had gotten back inside his car, and he was sitting in the passenger’s seat. Thomas said

that the officers then arrested the Defendant and looked under his front seat. They found a gun, and

Thomas recognized the gun as the same one that was pointed at him earlier.

On cross-examination, Thomas testified that he parked slanted from the phone when he

parked to make a phone call at Lou’s market that morning. He said that the person that called his

nickname looked like they were across the street, and he turned around. He said that he had never

seen he Defendant before, but he waited for him thinking that the Defendant knew him. Thomas was

beginning to get back into his car when the Defendant got within one or two feet of him, and the

Defendant asked for Thomas’ money. Thomas admitted that, in the statement he gave to police on

the morning of this incident, he told them that the Defendant approached him before he used the

phone, grabbed him and said, “B****, com here,” and then hit him with a pistol and attempted to

take his wallet. Thomas admitted that he had previously pled guilty to theft of property valued under

$500 on April 4, 1997, and he also previously pled guilty to the charge of robbery on January 21,

1994.

On redirect examination, Thomas said that the Defendant was wearing black pants, a gray

shirt, and white tennis shoes on the day of this incident. He said that he identified a photograph of

the Defendant for police.

Tom Warrick, an officer with the Memphis Police Department, testified that, on March 23,

2002, he was working when he got flagged down at around 8:30 a.m. by the victim of a robbery. He

said that the victim, Thomas, told him that he had been robbed, gave him a description of the vehicle

and individual involved, and pointed him out from across the street. Officer Warrick said that he

and his partner took the Defendant into custody and patted him down. The officer said that the

Defendant was sitting in the passenger’s seat, and the officer looked in the glove box, which was

near where the Defendant was sitting, for a gun. He said that he found a loaded Ruger, automatic,

nine millimeter gun in the glove box that was black and silver. Officer Warrick said that Thomas

was bleeding pretty profusely from his nose, and his nose looked like it had been broken.

2

On cross-examination, the officer said that there was no one else in the car with the

Defendant when he was arrested. He said that the Defendant was sitting in the passenger seat of his

car, which was parked in a parking lot across the street form Lou’s market. The officer said that,

when he took the Defendant into custody, the officer and his partner were the only other people

present. Officer Warrick said that he did not call for an ambulance between the time the victim

flagged him down and when he apprehended the Defendant.

Kimberly Tanzy, a criminal court clerk, testified that, in 1996, the Defendant pled guilty to

the unlawful possession of a controlled substance with the intent to sell or deliver it, which is a

felony.

Based upon this evidence, the jury convicted the Defendant of attempted aggravated robbery

and of being a felon in possession of a handgun.

II. Analysis

On appeal, the Defendant asserts that the evidence is insufficient to sustain either of his

convictions because they are based upon a sole eyewitness. When an accused challenges the

sufficiency of the evidence, this Court’s standard of review is whether, after considering the evidence

in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential

elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. Tenn. R. App. P.13(e); State v. Goodwin, 143

S.W.3d 771, 775 (Tenn. 2004) (citing State v. Reid, 91 S.W.3d 247, 276 (Tenn. 2002)). This rule

applies to findings of guilt based upon the direct evidence, circumstantial evidence, or a combination

of both direct and circumstantial evidence. State v. Pendergrass, 13 S.W.3d 389, 392-93 (Tenn.

Crim. App. 1999).

In determining the sufficiency of the evidence, this Court should not re-weigh or re-evaluate

the evidence. State v. Matthews, 805 S.W.2d 776, 779 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1990). Nor may this

Court substitute its inferences for those drawn by the trier of fact from the evidence. State v. Buggs,

995 S.W.2d 102, 105 (Tenn. 1999); Liakas v. State, 286 S.W.2d 856, 859 (Tenn. 1956). Questions

concerning the credibility of the witnesses, the weight and value of the evidence, and all factual

issues raised by the evidence are resolved by the trier of fact. Liakas, 286 S.W.2d at 859. This Court

must afford the State of Tennessee the strongest legitimate view of the evidence contained in the

record, as well as all reasonable inferences which may be drawn from the evidence. Goodwin, 143

S.W.3d at 775 (citing State v. Smith, 24 S.W.3d 274, 279 (Tenn. 2000). It is well-settled law in

Tennessee that “the testimony of a victim, by itself, is sufficient to support a conviction.” State v.

Strickland, 885 S.W.2d 85, 87 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1993); State v. Williams, 623 S.W.2d 118, 120

(Tenn. Crim. App. 1981). Because a verdict of guilt against a defendant removes the presumption

of innocence and raises a presumption of guilt, the convicted defendant bears the burden of showing

that the evidence was legally insufficient to sustain a guilty verdict. Id.; see State v. Carruthers, 35

S.W.3d 516, 557-58 (Tenn. 2000).

3

To convict the Defendant of aggravated robbery, the State was required to prove that the

Defendant “intentionally or knowingly took the property of another by violence of putting the person

in fear” and that this was “accomplished with a deadly weapon.” Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 39-13-401,-

402 (2003). To convict the defendant of the attempted aggravated robbery offenses, the State was

required to prove that the defendant:

(1) intentionally engaged in action or caused a result that would constitute an offense

if the circumstances surrounding the conduct were as the person believed them to be;

(2) acted with intent to cause a result that is an element of the offense, and believed

the conduct will cause the result without further conduct on his part; or (3) acted with

intent to complete a course of action or cause a result that would constitute the

offense, under the circumstances surrounding the conduct as the person believed

them to be, and the conduct constituted a substantial step toward commission of the

offense.

Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-12-101 (2003).

In the case under submission, the evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the

State is sufficient to support the Defendant’s conviction for attempted aggravated robbery. The

evidence shows that the Defendant approached the victim and asked the victim to give him all of the

victim’s money. When the victim refused, the Defendant brandished a two-toned silver and gray 9

millimeter gun, and he used that gun to break the victim’s nose. The victim saw the Defendant get

into a brown or gray four-door sedan, like a Chevy Malibu or a Taurus. The victim flagged down

police, who arrested the Defendant while he was sitting in the passenger’s seat of a four-door

Chevrolet. A brief search for reasons officer safety, revealed a two-toned, black and silver, 9

millimeter gun in the glove box. This evidence is sufficient to sustain the Defendant’s conviction

for attempted aggravated robbery.

The Defendant also contends that the evidence is insufficient to support his conviction for

being a felon in the unlawful possession of a handgun. In order to establish the crime of being a

felon in the unlawful possession of a handgun, the State must prove, pursuant to Tennessee Code

Annotated section 39-17-1307 (2003), that: (1) the Defendant possessed a handgun; and (2) was

previously “convicted of a felony drug offense.” Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-17-1307(b)(1)(B). There

is no dispute that the Defendant was convicted of possession with intent to sell offer .5 grams of

cocaine in 1996, which is a felony. Further, the Defendant was taken into custody while he was

sitting in the passenger’s side of a car, and the weapon was found in the glove box of that car.

Further, the weapons match the description of the weapon that was used by the Defendant in an

attempted aggravated robbery a short time prior to his arrest. Accordingly, the evidence is clearly

sufficient to sustain the Defendant’s conviction. The Defendant is not entitled to relief on this issue.

4

III. Conclusion

In accordance with the foregoing reasoning and authorities, we affirm the Defendant’s

convictions.

___________________________________

ROBERT W. WEDEMEYER, JUDGE

5