Opinion

Jimmy Newell v. State of Tennessee

Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee
Filed
Jul 3, 2017
Status
Published
On the bench
Judge D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 3.8%

The opinion

07/03/2017

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE

JIMMY NEWELL v. STATE OF TENNESSEE

Appeal from the Criminal Court for Bradley County

No. 16-CR-287 Andrew M. Freiberg, Judge

No. E2016-01755-CCA-R3-ECN

The pro se Petitioner, Jimmy Newell, appeals as of right from the Bradley County

Criminal Court’s order summarily dismissing his petition for writ of error coram nobis

alleging that the State violated the terms of his plea agreement by filing a letter of

opposition to parole with the Board of Parole. The State has filed a motion to affirm the

trial court’s judgment pursuant to Rule 20 of the Rules of the Tennessee Court of

Criminal Appeals. Following our review, we conclude that the State’s motion is well-

taken and affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Tenn. R. App. P. 3; Judgment of the Criminal Court Affirmed

Pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals

D. KELLY THOMAS, JR., J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which JAMES CURWOOD

WITT, JR., and NORMA MCGEE OGLE, JJ., joined.

Jimmy Newell, Cleveland, Tennessee, Pro Se.

Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; Renee W. Turner, Senior Counsel;

and Stephen Davis Crump, District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of

Tennessee.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On May 20, 2014, the Petitioner pleaded guilty pursuant to a negotiated plea

agreement to various offenses - including three misdemeanor probation violations, four

simple or domestic assault offenses, and two felony theft offenses - in exchange for an

effective sentence of four years as a Range I, standard offender. Within weeks of

entering his plea, the Petitioner began challenging the guilty pleas and sentencing without

success. On July 29, 2016, the Petitioner filed a petition for writ of error coram nobis

alleging newly discovered evidence that the District Attorney General filed a letter in

opposition to the Petitioner’s parole hearing in May 2015.1 The trial court summarily

dismissed the petition, ruling that the Petitioner could not challenge his guilty-pleaded

convictions via a writ of error coram nobis. Frazier v. State, 495 S.W.3d 246, 253 (Tenn.

2016). The Petitioner filed a timely notice of appeal from the trial court’s judgment.

The State correctly asserts that the trial court’s summary dismissal should be

affirmed because a writ of error coram nobis is not available to challenge convictions

arising from a guilty plea. Id. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the Bradley

County Criminal Court pursuant to Rule 20 of the Rules of the Tennessee Court of

Criminal Appeals.

_________________________________

D. KELLY THOMAS, JR., JUDGE

1

The court notes that the Tennessee Department of Correction database reflects that, as of March 21, 2017, the

Petitioner has been released from confinement and is no longer subject to any supervision.

-2-

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.