 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Jansen7/8/1999
n the instant case, the record fails to show that the trial court based its ruling on a finding of abuse of discretion by the district attorney general but, to the contrary, reflects that the trial court substituted its judgment for that of the district attorney general in what it considered a "borderline deal." By doing so, the trial court erroneously assumed a role vested exclusively in the district attorney general. Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-15-105; Poplar, 612 S.W.2d at 500.
The evidence in the record does not preponderate in support of the trial court's decision overruling the district attorney general and granting pretrial diversion. On the other hand, the evidence shows that, after considering the pretrial diversion reports submitted in support of the defendants' application, the district attorney general detailed six reasons for his denial of pretrial diversion.
Accordingly, we reverse the order placing the defendants on pretrial diversion and remand this case to the trial court for further proceedings.
JAMES C. BEASLEY, SR., SPECIAL JUDGE
CONCUR: JOHN H. PEAY, JUDGE JOE G. RILEY, JUDGE
|