Opinion

State v. Jefferson

  • 529 S.W.2d 674
  • 1975 Tenn. LEXIS 583
Court
Tennessee Supreme Court
Filed
Nov 10, 1975
Status
Published
On the bench
Walker, Russell, O'Brien
Cited by
91 cases

Overruled on other grounds by State v. Mitchell, 1980 Tenn. LEXIS 395 (1980)

holding that indictment which charged first degree premeditated murder and first degree felony murder in a single count was not duplicitous

How later courts described this case

  • holding that indictment which charged first degree premeditated murder and first degree felony murder in a single count was not duplicitous
  • stating that it is essential to protection of society that wide discretion be vested in officers chosen to enforce our laws
  • holding that two distinct offenses cannot generally be charged in the same count of the indictment
  • stating that an indictment charging more than one offense in a single count is duplicitous

Written by the judges who cited it.

Later courts went against this

  • Overruled on other grounds by State v. Mitchell, 1980 Tenn. LEXIS 395 (1980)

    529 S.W.2d 674, 678 (Tenn. 1975) (holding that indictment which charged first degree premeditated murder and first degree felony murder in a single count was not duplicitous), overruled on other grounds by State v. Mitchell, 593 S.W.2d 280, 286
    Tennessee Supreme CourtJan 14, 19808 citing opinionsother groundsRead it

The opinion

OPINION ON PETITION FOR REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

A petition to rehear has been filed in this cause by the defendant, James Thomas Jefferson. The petition does not set forth any new matters not considered by the Court of Criminal Appeals on appeal and by this Court on defendant’s petition for certiorari.

In denying defendant’s petition for cer-tiorari this Court was aware of the incorrect statement “Jefferson was first tried for the rape of Mrs. Bolte,” when as a matter of fact each of the two trials was for the murder of Mr. Bolte. This incorrect statement in the opinion of the Court of Criminal Appeals was immaterial to the questions raised on appeal, and from an examination of the record resulted from the fact that in a written motion, counsel for the defendant so referred to it. The opinion of the Court of Criminal Appeals correctly reviews the evidence, and the law applicable to the assignments of error on the appeal.

The petition to rehear is denied.

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.