# FILED
December 12, 1997 Cecil W. Crowson Appellate Cou rt Clerk IN THE COURT OF CRIMI NAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT NASHVILLE NOVEMBER 1997 S ESSION

STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) ) Appellee, ) No. 01C01-9609-CR-00414

) ) Putnam County v. ) ) Honorable Leon Burns, Jr., Judge ) SCOTTY WRIGHT, ) (Sentencing) ) Appellant. ) For the Appellant : For the Appellee : David Neal Brady John Knox Walkup District Public Defender Attorney General of Tennessee and and H. Marshall Judd Janis L. Turner Assistant Public Defender Assistant Attorney Gener al of Tennessee 215 215 Reagan Street 450 James Robertson Parkwa y Cookeville, TN 38501 Nashville, TN 37243-0493 William Edward Gibson District Attorney General and Lillie Ann Sells Assistant District A

ttorney General 145 South Jefferson Avenue Cookeville, TN 38501

OPINION FILED:____________________
APPEAL DISMISSED Joseph M. Tipton Judge2 O P I N I O N
The defendant, Scotty Wright, appeals as of rig ht from the Putnam County Criminal Cour

t relative to sentences imposed upon him for two offenses of the sale of over .5 grams of coca ine, Class B felonies. He received two eig ht-year concurrent sentences, wi th split confinement ordered by which he was to ser

ve one year in jail wi

th the balance suspended and then be pla ced on probation for eleven years. In this appeal, h e complains about the one year of confinement that was imposed.

The issue in this case is moot . The judgments of conviction were entered August 13, 1996, and provided the defendan t with one hundred five days pretrial jail credit as of August 12, 1996. The j udgments state that the defendant was to be released from jail on April 29, 1997. The record reflects tha t the defendant remained in jail pending this appeal.

Thus, the defendant served his year in confineme nt by the end of April 1997, approximately one month after the appellee’s brief was filed by the state. With the sole issue being w

hether the defendant should have been c onfined for a year, the matter is moot and the case should be dismissed. See State ex rel. Lewis v. State , 208 Tenn. 534, 537-38, 347 S.W.2d 47, 48 (1961); State v. Rogers , 703 S.W.2d 166, 169 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1985).

We note that there was no request for an ex pedited appeal process and decision in this case. See T.R.A.P. 2. Also, although the defendant f iled a motion in May 1997 to dismiss his appeal, accompanied by his s igned affidavit to that effect, neither the motion nor the affidavit provide any basis for the dismissal. That is, th e motion simply states that the defendant “moves the court to di smiss his appeal.” The1 The appellat e court cle rk’s fi le contai ns a copy of a l etter dat ed April 15, 1997, fr

om the defendant’s counsel to t he assistant attorney

general assi gned to thi s case noting t hat a motion and or der to dismiss the

appeal would be fil ed because the defendant had served his time and the i ssue on appeal was moot. Thus, alt hough counsel for the parti es were then aware t hat the appeal should be di smissed, no one notif ied thi s court. Counsel should not assume that sending to t he clerk a copy of a let ter addressed to opposi ng counsel wil l be brought to the at

tentio n of the court

or that i

t is even p roper for t he court to take note of it as a matter of proof. 3 motion was denied in May 1997 for the failure of the defendant’s affidavit to show that he had been advised of his appeal r ights and expressly

waived those rig hts. See Tenn. Ct. Crim. App. R. 11. No further action was taken by the parties. 1 Thus, this case remained on the active docket and was ultimately as

signed to this panel.
In any event, we hold that this case should be dismissed for mootness with the costs taxed against the defendant.

_______________________________ Joseph M. Tipton, Judge CONCUR:

________________________ John H. Peay, Judge

________________________ David H. Welles, Judge