# Daniels v. Traughber

> Court of Appeals of Tennessee · May 6, 1998 · 984 S.W.2d 918

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9526247

## Case

- **Full name:** Robert C. DANIELS, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. Charles TRAUGHBER, Chairman, Tennessee Board of Paroles, Et Al., Defendants/Appellees
- **Court:** Court of Appeals of Tennessee
- **Decided:** May 6, 1998
- **Citations:** 984 S.W.2d 918; 1998 Tenn. App. LEXIS 315; 1998 WL 221075
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Cantrell
- **Judges:** Presiding Judge Henry F. Todd
- **Cited by:** 24 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9526247

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- finding that these rights derive from the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and Article I, Section 23 of the Tennessee Constitution

## Opinion text

BEN H. CANTRELL, Judge,
concurring.
I concur with the decision to affirm the trial court’s order. In my view, it is simply a case of statutory application. In the “Open Parole Hearing Act” of 1993 the legislature provided that the Parole Board shall receive and consider victim impact statements, Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-28-504 (a); that notice be given to the victim or the victim’s representative and to the trial judge and district attorney involved in the original criminal prosecution. Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-28-505(b)(l), (2) and (4); and that on a failure to provide the required notices, the Board may schedule a new hearing if the Board receives a written victim impact statement within fifteen days of the time the parole decision is finalized, Tenn.Code Ann. § 40-28-505(d)(2).
The facts of this case fit the statute almost perfectly. I believe the Board was justified in scheduling the second hearing and in considering the feelings of the victim’s family. I believe that is what the legislature intended for the Board to do.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9526247. Public record. Not legal advice.