FILED

December 12, 1997

Cecil W. Crowson

Appellate Court Clerk

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT NASHVILLE 

 NOVEMBER 1997 SESSION

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 General of Tennessee 215

215 Reagan Street 450 James Robertson Parkway

Cookeville, TN 38501 Nashville, TN 37243-0493

William Edward Gibson

District Attorney General

and

Lillie Ann Sells

Assistant District Attorney General

145 South Jefferson Avenue

Cookeville, TN 38501

OPINION FILED:____________________

APPEAL DISMISSED

Joseph M. Tipton

Judge
2

O P I N I O N

The defendant, Scotty Wright, appeals as of right from the Putnam

County Criminal Court relative to sentences imposed upon him for two offenses of the

sale of over .5 grams of cocaine, Class B felonies. He received two eight-year

concurrent sentences, with split confinement ordered by which he was to serve one

year in jail with the balance suspended and then be placed on probation for eleven

years. In this appeal, he 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 defendant with one hundred five days pretrial jail

credit as of August 12, 1996. The judgments state that the defendant was to be

released from jail on April 29, 1997. The record reflects that the defendant remained in

jail pending this appeal. 

Thus, the defendant served his year in confinement by the end of April

1997, approximately one month after the appellee’s brief was filed by the state. With

the sole issue being whether the defendant should have been confined 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 expedited appeal process and

decision in this case. See T.R.A.P. 2. Also, although the defendant filed a motion in

May 1997 to dismiss his appeal, accompanied by his signed affidavit to that effect,

neither the motion nor the affidavit provide any basis for the dismissal. That is, the

motion simply states that the defendant “moves the court to dismiss his appeal.” The
1

 The appellate court clerk’s file contains a copy of a letter dated April 15, 1997, from the

defendant’s counsel to the assistant attorney general assigned to this case noting that a motion and order

to dismiss the appeal would be filed because the defendant had served his time and the issue on appeal

was moot. Thus, although counsel for the parties were then aware that the appeal should be dismissed,

no one notified this court. Counsel should not assume that sending to the clerk a copy of a letter

addressed to opposing counsel will be brought to the attention of the court or that it is even proper for the

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 rights and expressly waived those rights. 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 assigned 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