# State v. Jefferson

> Tennessee Supreme Court · November 10, 1975 · 529 S.W.2d 674

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9682193

## Case

- **Full name:** STATE of Tennessee, Petitioner, v. James Thomas JEFFERSON, Respondent
- **Court:** Tennessee Supreme Court
- **Decided:** November 10, 1975
- **Citations:** 529 S.W.2d 674; 1975 Tenn. LEXIS 583
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** On rehearing
- **Judges:** Walker, Russell, O'Brien
- **Cited by:** 91 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- **Red flag:** Overruled on other grounds by State v. Mitchell, 1980 Tenn. LEXIS 395 (1980).
- Negative treatments: 1
- Distinguished by: 0
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9682193

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- 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

## Opinion text

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.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9682193. Public record. Not legal advice.