State v. Robert Taylor ( 1998 )


Menu:
  •               IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE
    AT JACKSON                     FILED
    December 21, 1998
    ROBERT LEE TAYLOR,                          )
    Cecil Crowson, Jr.
    )                     Appellate C ourt Clerk
    Petitioner,                          ) C. C. A. NO. 02C01-9808-CC-00239
    )
    vs.                                         ) LAKE COUNTY
    )
    STATE OF TENNESSEE,                         ) No. 98-7823
    )
    Respondent.                          )
    ORDER
    This matter is before the Court upon the state’s motion to affirm the trial
    court judgment by order pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals.
    This case represents an appeal from the denial of the petitioner’s petition for writ of
    habeas corpus. The petitioner was convicted of first degree murder in August 1982.
    On July 21, 1998, the petitioner filed a petition for writ of habeas corpus challenging the
    sufficiency of the first degree murder indictment returned in 1981. This Court recently
    filed an order affirming the trial court’s denial of a similar petition for writ of habeas
    corpus filed by the petitioner attacking the sufficiency of this very indictment. Robert
    Lee Taylor v. State, No. 02C01-9701-CC-00019 (Tenn. Crim. App., November 3, 1997),
    perm. to app. denied, (Tenn. November 24, 1997).
    The petitioner contends the indictment at issue is void because it fails to
    contain the requisite mens rea of the charged offense. The indictment alleges the
    petitioner “unlawfully, feloniously, wilfully, deliberately, premeditatedly and maliciously
    did kill and murder [the victim].” At the time of the offense in this case, first degree
    murder was defined as “[e]very murder perpetrated by means of poison, lying in wait, or
    by other kind of willful, deliberate, malicious, and premeditated killing, or committed in
    the perpetration of, or attempt to perpetrate, [one of the enumerated felonies, including
    robbery].” T.C.A. § 39-2402 (1981 supp.). As we found in our previous order, the
    indictment in this case satisfies constitutional and the then existing statutory
    requirements. See Dykes v. Compton, -- S.W.2d -- (Tenn. 1998) (holding that the
    analysis outlined in State v. Hill, 
    954 S.W.2d 725
     (Tenn. 1997) applies with equal
    relevance to crimes committed before 1989).
    Accordingly, for the reasons stated above, it is hereby ORDERED,
    pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals, that the judgment of the
    trial court dismissing the petition for writ of habeas corpus is affirmed. Costs of this
    appeal shall be assessed against the state.
    _____________________________
    DAVID G. HAYES, JUDGE
    _____________________________
    PAUL G. SUMMERS, JUDGE
    _____________________________
    JOE G. RILEY, JUDGE
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 02C01-9808-CC-00239

Filed Date: 12/21/1998

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 10/30/2014