 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Hill4/8/1999
contends that the trial court erred by ordering him to serve his thirty-five-year sentence consecutively to his previous sentence for assault with intent to commit first degree murder. We believe that the evidence supports the trial court's imposition of a consecutive sentence. The evidence reflects that the defendant was on parole for the assault conviction when he committed the present offense. Pursuant to T.C.A. § 40-28-123, the defendant must complete the sentence for the offense for which he was paroled before serving the subsequent sentence for the later felony committed while on parole. The defendant's consecutive sentencing is mandated by law.
In consideration of the foregoing and the record as a whole, the judgment of conviction is affirmed.
Joseph M. Tipton, Judge
CONCUR:
Joe G. Riley, Judge
Thomas T. Woodall, Judge
|