 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Parvin8/29/2001
Assigned on Briefs March 20, 2001
The Sullivan County grand jury issued presentments against the defendant on one count of operating a motor vehicle without a face shield; two counts of speeding; three counts of driving under the influence ; three counts of driving on a revoked license; two counts of driving on revoked license after second or subsequent conviction for driving while intoxicated; one count of driving on revoked license after second or subsequent conviction for driving under the influence; one count of driving while intoxicated, fourth offense; and one count of driving under the influence, fourth offense. The charges resulted from three separate cases. The defendant pled to all of the crimes in two different plea hearings and the defendant was sentenced as a career offender to a total of eighteen years, with a minimum jail time of 585 days, and with his last six years to be served on probation. The trial court sentenced the defendant as a career offender and did not apprise the defendant of the possibility that he could be sentenced as a persistent offender, as opposed to a career offender. He moved to withdraw his guilty pleas on this ground. The trial court denied his motion, and he appeals the denial. Furthermore, the defendant waived his right to request probation or alternative sentencing in one case, and the state agreed to allow the defendant to serve probation in one case. In the third case, the defendant requested probation or alternative sentencing. The trial court denied his request, citing his extensive criminal history in support of its denial. The defendant also appeals this denial. After reviewing the record and applicable case law, we find these issues to be without merit and therefore affirm the lower court's denial of defendant's motion to withdraw his guilty pleas and its denial of probation or alternative sentencing.
Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Criminal Court is Affirmed.
Jerry L. Smith, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which Joe G. Riley and Alan E. Glenn, JJ., joined.
OPINION
Statement of the Facts
On March 30, 1999, the defendant, Mr. Glenn Russell Parvin, was arrested for operating a motorcycle without a face shield, speeding, driving under the influence , driving on a revoked license, and driving on revoked license after second or subsequent conviction for driving while intoxicated [hereinafter Case S42,893]. On June 3, 1999, the defendant was arrested for speeding, driving under the influence, driving on a revoked license, driving on a revoked license after a second or subsequent conviction for driving while intoxicated, and driving while intoxicated, fourth offense [hereinafter Case S42,853]. On July 5, 1999, the defendant was arrested for driving under the influence, driving under the influence, fourth offense, driving on a revoked license, and driving on a revoked license after a second or subsequent conviction for driving while intoxicated [hereinafter Case S43,039]. Thereafter, Sullivan County grand juries issued presentments against the defendant for the crimes committed on the above dates.
On December 15, 1999, the defendant pled guilty to the charges in Case S42,893. He entered an open plea with the court, reserving the determination of the length and manner of sentencing for the court. The court scheduled a hearing to determine whether the defendant would receive probation or alternative sentencing in lieu of jail time. However, before the date of that hearing, the defendant entered into a plea agreement with the state regarding Case S42,893, in which the state agreed to enter a nolle prosequi for the charges of speeding and driving a motorc
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Tennessee DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|