IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT JACKSON

Assigned on Briefs February 7, 2017

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JESSE JAMES SOMERVILLE, IV

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Tipton County

No. 8302 Joe H. Walker, III, Judge

___________________________________

No. W2016-01128-CCA-R3-CD

___________________________________

The defendant, Jesse James Somerville, IV, appeals the order of the trial court revoking 

his probation and imposing his original sentence of eight years in confinement. Upon 

review of the record, we conclude the trial court did not abuse its discretion in finding 

that the defendant violated the terms of his probation. Accordingly, the judgment of the 

trial court is affirmed.

Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Circuit Court Affirmed

J. ROSS DYER, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which THOMAS T. WOODALL, P.J.,

and CAMILLE R. MCMULLEN, J., joined.

Tracey A. Brewer-Walker, Ripley, Tennessee, for the appellant, Kelly Lynn Chandler.

Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; Robert W. Wilson, Assistant 

Attorney General; D. Mike Dunavant, District Attorney General; and Jason Poyner, 

Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

OPINION

FACTS

On January 8, 2016, after originally being indicted for one count of attempted first 

degree murder and one count of employing a firearm during the commission of a 

dangerous felony, the defendant entered a nolo contendere plea to the offense of 

attempted second degree murder and the remaining count was dismissed. The trial court 

suspended the defendant’s original sentence of eight years in confinement and placed him 

02/28/2017
- 2 -

on eight years of supervised probation effective January 8, 2016. The terms of probation 

required the defendant to obey all laws, maintain employment, and not engage in any 

assaultive, abusive, threatening, or intimidating behavior. Under the terms of probation, 

the defendant also agreed not to use or possess any illegal drugs or weapons.

While on probation, the defendant was involved in additional criminal activity for 

which a probation violation warrant issued. The warrant alleged the defendant was 

arrested on February 16, 2016, and charged with four new offenses, including possession 

of a schedule VI drug with intent to sell,1possession of drug paraphernalia, possession of 

a firearm while in the commission of a dangerous felony, and felon in possession of a 

firearm. The warrant alleged that during the February arrest, the defendant engaged in 

intimidating behavior. Further, the warrant indicated the defendant failed a drug screen 

for THC on January 19, 2016. And finally, the warrant alleged technical violations of 

probation, including the defendant’s failure to comply with his referral to a resource 

center program, failure to pay supervision fees, and failure to maintain lawful 

employment.

The trial court held a joint violation of probation hearing for the defendant and codefendant, Billy Joe Tipton. The State called two witnesses. Mark Winston, of the 

Board of Probation and Parole, outlined the defendant’s probation file, noting the 

defendant failed a drug screen on January 19, 2016, failed to pay probation supervision 

fees, failed to comply with his referral to a resource center program, and failed to 

maintain employment.

Covington police officer Michael Gan then testified regarding the defendant’s 

February arrest. He explained that while on patrol with another officer in the area of Carr 

and Howard Streets, he saw four to five men run from a parked vehicle and into a house. 

One of the men was wearing white clothing. As the officers approached the parked 

vehicle, they smelled a heavy odor of marijuana. The officers then approached the house 

and heard the homeowner yelling at the men to get out of her home. Officers secured the 

perimeter of the house and ultimately arrested the defendant, Billy Joe Tipton, Ramel 

Jackson, and Royal Harvey, who lived in the home. According to Officer Gan, the 

defendant was the only arrestee wearing white clothing.

After obtaining consent from the homeowner, the officers searched the home. In 

one of the bedrooms they located gang literature, marijuana, torn sandwich bags, and a 

9mm Glock pistol with an extended magazine. The pistol was covered by a blue bandana 

 

1According to the defendant’s brief, the defendant was arrested for possession of a schedule VI 

drug. However, a typographical error was made on both the warrant and probation violation report which 

charge the defendant with possession of a schedule IV drug.
- 3 -

and hidden in a chair. In the kitchen, officers found “a felony amount of marijuana.” 

The owner of the home told officers the pistol was not hers. She also told officers she 

saw the defendant enter the bedroom and “reach down towards” the chair where the pistol 

was found. Officers then searched the parked vehicle which belonged to Ramel Jackson. 

Inside the vehicle officers found a glove that smelled like marijuana, marijuana, and a 

pistol. All four men arrested on February 16, 2016, were charged with possession of the 

illegal items found incident to the search. 

The defendant offered no proof to dispute the State’s evidence. Rather, the 

defendant argued that he had been “continuously incarcerated for the majority of the time 

since [February 16, 2016], [and] he hasn’t had an opportunity to pay [probation] fees, [or] 

get employment of that nature.” The defendant requested that the trial court delay its 

probation ruling until “a determination of whether or not there was, in fact, ample 

evidence” to support the defendant’s possession charges. The trial court declined, finding

the defendant “did not comply with the rules of probation.” 

In revoking the defendant’s probation, the trial court relied primarily on the 

February 16, 2016 arrest, though it did note the defendant failed to comply with a referral 

to a resource center program. The trial court stated the defendant was “present where 

there was a strong odor of marijuana. Marijuana was actually found and handguns were 

found.” As such, the trial court ordered the defendant to serve the original eight-year 

sentence in the Tennessee Department of Correction. This appeal followed.

ANALYSIS

On appeal, the defendant argues insufficient evidence exists in the record to 

support the trial court’s revocation of his probation. The defendant claims the trial court 

relied on “mere accusations,” rather than substantial evidence in revoking his probation. 

Specifically, the defendant argues the evidence is insufficient because the homeowner’s 

statements were unreliable and officers did not see the defendant in actual possession of 

drugs or weapons. He contends no evidence exists to show the defendant had actual 

possession of the weapons and drugs for which he was arrested and suggests that the 

drugs and weapons were likely already in the home prior to the defendant’s entrance. 

The State contends sufficient evidence exists because “officers found firearms and 

marijuana in both locations where either the officers or [the homeowner] observed the 

defendant.” After our review, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

A trial court has statutory authority to revoke a suspended sentence upon finding 

that the defendant violated the conditions of the sentence by a preponderance of the 

evidence. Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-310, -311; see State v. Clyde Turner, No. M2012-

02405-CCA-R3-CD, 2013 WL 5436718, at *2 (Tenn. Crim. App. Sept. 27, 2013). “The 
- 4 -

trial judge has a duty at probation revocation hearings to adduce sufficient evidence to 

allow him to make an intelligent decision.” State v. Leach, 914 S.W.2d 104, 106 (Tenn. 

Crim. App. 1995) (citing State v. Mitchell, 810 S.W.2d 733, 735 (Tenn. Crim. App. 

1991)). If a violation is found by the trial court during the probationary period, the time 

within which it must act is tolled and the court can order the defendant to serve the 

original sentence in full. Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-310; see State v. Lewis, 917 S.W.2d 

251, 256 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1995). To overturn the trial court’s revocation, the defendant 

must show the trial court abused its discretion. State v. Shaffer, 45 S.W.3d 553, 554 

(Tenn. 2001). “In order to find such an abuse, there must be no substantial evidence to 

support the conclusion of the trial court that a violation of the conditions of probation has 

occurred.” Id. (citing State v. Harkins, 811 S.W.2d 79, 82 (Tenn.1991)).

Here, the record contains substantial evidence to support the trial court’s decision 

to revoke probation and reinstate the defendant’s original sentence. On January 8, 2016, 

the defendant pled guilty to attempted second degree murder and began eight years of 

supervised probation. The terms of the defendant’s probation specifically required him to 

maintain employment, comply with a referral to a resource center program, pay 

supervision fees, and refrain from using illegal drugs or possessing firearms. At the 

revocation hearing, Mr. Winston testified regarding evidence of the defendant’s failure to 

meet the terms of his probation, specifically that he failed a drug test on January 19, 

2016, failed to pay fines, failed to maintain employment, and failed to attend a rehab 

program. 

Further, Officer Gan testified to the facts surrounding the defendant’s arrest for 

possession of marijuana and firearms. Officer Gan testified that he saw a man dressed in 

white clothing, the defendant, run from the parked vehicle and into the house. Officers 

found marijuana in the parked vehicle and inside the house. Additionally, the 

homeowner saw the defendant “reach down towards” the chair where officers later found 

a 9mm pistol. As noted by the State, Tennessee recognizes constructive possession of 

items and the defendant was arrested for the same. See State v. Fife, No. M2013-02211-

CCA-R3-CD, 2014 WL 2902276, at *5 (Tenn. Crim. App. June 26, 2014) (internal 

citations omitted) (“A person constructively possesses an item when he or she has the 

power and intention at a given time to exercise dominion and control over [the 

contraband] either directly or through others.”).

Accordingly, the record contains sufficient evidence that the defendant violated 

the terms of his probation. Not only did the trial court consider evidence of his arrest for 

possession of both marijuana and firearms, but the court also heard evidence of the 

defendant’s failure to comply with technical terms of his probation. See Turner, No. 

M2012-02405-CCA-R3-CD, 2013 WL 5436718, at *2. For these reasons, the trial court 

acted within its discretion in ordering the defendant to serve his original sentence of eight 
- 5 -

years in the Tennessee Department of Correction. Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-35-310; see

Turner, No. M2012-02405-CCA-R3-CD, 2013 WL 5436718, at *2. The defendant is not 

entitled to relief.

CONCLUSION

Based upon the foregoing authorities and reasoning, we affirm the judgment of the 

trial court revoking the defendant’s probation and ordering him to serve the original 

sentence in confinement.

____________________________________

J. ROSS DYER, JUDGE