 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Payne11/20/2002
der, the jury obviously rejected his claim that he was incapable of forming a knowing mental state at the time of the shooting, or that the shooting occurred in a state of passion produced by adequate provocation. This was within its province. See State v. Johnson, 909 S.W.2d 461, 464 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1995) ("Whether the acts constitute a `knowing killing' (second degree murder) or a killing due to `adequate provocation' (voluntary manslaughter) is a question for the jury."). The evidence in this case, viewed in the light most favorable to the State, was sufficient for a rational trier of fact to reject the defendant's claim of self-defense, and to conclude that the defendant was aware of his conduct and its likely results at the time the shooting occurred. We, therefore, conclude that the evidence is sufficient to sustain the defendant's conviction for second degree murder.
B. Criminal Attempt to Commit Especially Aggravated Robbery
The defendant also contends that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction for attempted especially aggravated robbery, again arguing that the inconsistent verdicts demonstrate that the jury could not have accredited the witnesses for the State. However, as we have previously discussed, consistency between verdicts on separate counts of an indictment or indictments is not required in Tennessee. See Wiggins, 498 S.W.2d at 93. A person commits criminal attempt who, "acting with the kind of culpability otherwise required for the offense: . . . cts with intent to complete a course of action or cause a result that would constitute the offense, under the circumstances surrounding the conduct as the person believes them to be, and the conduct constitutes a substantial step toward the commission of the offense." Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-12-101(a)(3) (1997). Especially aggravated robbery is defined as a robbery " ccomplished with a deadly weapon; and here the victim suffers serious bodily injury." Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-403(a) (1997). Robbery is defined as "the intentional or knowing theft of property from the person of another by violence or putting the person in fear." Tenn. Code Ann.§ 39-13-401(a) (1997).
The evidence at trial, viewed in the light most favorable to the State, establishes that the defendant, armed with two guns, approached the group in which the victim was standing and ordered him to "drop it off." He then threw the victim face down on the porch and demanded his money. As the victim was pulling his pockets out and protesting that he had no money, the defendant shot him in the legs and then in the head, causing his death. This evidence was sufficient for a rational trier of fact to find the defendant guilty of attempted especially aggravated robbery beyond a reasonable doubt.
IV. Sentencing
The defendant's final two issues involve challenges to the trial court's sentencing determinations. When an accused challenges the length and manner of service of a sentence, it is the duty of this court to conduct a de novo review on the record with a presumption that "the determinations made by the court from which the appeal is taken are correct." Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-401(d). This presumption is "conditioned upon the affirmative showing in the record that the trial court considered the sentencing principles and all relevant facts and circumstances." State v. Ashby, 823 S.W.2d 166, 169 (Tenn. 1991).
In conducting a de novo review of a sentence, this court must consider (a) any evidence received at the trial and/or sentencing hearing, (b) the presentence report, (c) the principles of sentencing, (d) the arguments of counsel relative to sentencing alternatives, (e) the nature and characteristics of th
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Tennessee DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|