Supreme Court Opinions

Format: 03/01/2015
Format: 03/01/2015
Gene v. Aaby,
03S02-9507-CH-00073
Authoring Judge:
Trial Court Judge:
Supreme Court 06/24/96
01S01-9510-CC-00173
Authoring Judge:
Trial Court Judge: Donald P. Harris
Supreme Court 06/24/96
01S01-9412-FD-00155
Authoring Judge:
Trial Court Judge:
Supreme Court 06/24/96
01S01-9601-CC-00022
Authoring Judge:
Trial Court Judge:
Supreme Court 06/24/96
01S01-9601-CC-00022
Authoring Judge:
Trial Court Judge:
Supreme Court 06/24/96
02S01-9410-CC-00069
Authoring Judge:
Trial Court Judge:
Supreme Court 06/17/96
02S01-9410-CC-00069
Authoring Judge:
Trial Court Judge:
Supreme Court 06/17/96
02S01-9501-CH-00005
Authoring Judge:
Trial Court Judge:
Supreme Court 06/10/96
02S01-9502-CC-00013
Authoring Judge:
Trial Court Judge:
Supreme Court 06/10/96
01S01-9503-CC-00034
Authoring Judge:
Trial Court Judge: Charles D. Haston, Sr.
Supreme Court 06/10/96
01S01-9503-CC-00034
Authoring Judge:
Trial Court Judge: Charles D. Haston, Sr.
Supreme Court 06/10/96
State of Tennesee v. Mario Lamont Wilson
02S01-9505-CC-00045
Authoring Judge: Justice Penny J. White
Trial Court Judge: Judge John Franklin Murchison

A jury convicted defendant, Mario Lamont Wilson, of three counts of aggravated assault and of felony reckless endangerment and possession of a deadly weapon with the intent to commit a felony. The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed Wilson’s felony reckless endangerment conviction and sentence, but reversed and dismissed the convictions for aggravated assault and possession of a deadly weapon. We granted permission to appeal to consider whether the Court of Criminal Appeals erred when it dismissed Wilson’s convictions for aggravated assault.1 Although we conclude that Wilson’s convictions for aggravated assault may not stand, we do not adopt entirely the reasoning of the Court of Criminal Appeals. Rather, we affirm the dismissal of the aggravated assault charges because the evidence is insufficient to prove that Wilson intentionally and knowingly caused another to reasonably fear imminent bodily injury.

Madison County Supreme Court 06/03/96
Charles M. Cary, Jr. v. Cathy Ann Cary
02S01-9505-CV-00035
Authoring Judge: Chief Justice E. Riley Anderson
Trial Court Judge: Judge C. Creed McGinley

We granted this appeal to determine whether a provision in an antenuptial agreement by which a prospective spouse waives alimony is void because it violates public policy. The trial court held that such a provision in an antenuptial agreement, which waived alimony, was valid and enforceable and, therefore, denied the spouse’s application for alimony. The Court of Appeals, however, reversed, holding that the waiver of alimony provision was void as against public policy, and remanded to the trial court to consider whether to award alimony.

Hardeman County Supreme Court 06/03/96