IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT JACKSON

Assigned on Briefs June 3, 2003

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. DOUGLAS LEE OVERALL

 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Tipton County

No. 4138 Joseph H. Walker, Judge

No. W2002-01954-CCA-R3-CD - Filed September 23, 2003

The defendant, Douglas Lee Overall, was convicted by a Tipton County Circuit Court jury of

aggravated kidnapping, a Class B felony; aggravated assault, a Class C felony; and possession of

drug paraphernalia, a Class A misdemeanor. The trial court sentenced him to concurrent sentences

of twelve years for the aggravated kidnapping conviction, twelve years for the aggravated assault

conviction, and eleven months, twenty-ninedaysforthe possession of drug paraphernalia conviction.

The defendant appeals, claiming that the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions. We

affirm the judgments of the trial court. 

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

JOSEPH M. TIPTON, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which DAVID G. HAYES and JAMES

CURWOOD WITT, JR., JJ., joined.

Clifford K. McGown, Jr., Waverly, Tennessee (on appeal), and Gary F. Antrican, District Public

Defender and David S. Stockton, Assistant Public Defender (at trial), for the appellant, Douglas Lee

Overall.

Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Thomas E. Williams, III, Assistant Attorney

General; Elizabeth T. Rice, District Attorney General; and Colin A. Campell, Assistant District

Attorney General, for the appellant, State of Tennessee.

OPINION

This case relates to the defendant’s conduct toward George Harper on January 29, 2001. At

trial, Officer Larry Ham testified he was on patrol for the Covington Police Department and was

attempting to serve an arrest warrant on an individual believed to be at Mr. Harper’s residence.

Officer Ham stated he had been to Mr. Harper’s residence the previous night and saw that Mr.

Harper looked normal. On the afternoon of January 29, 2001, Officer Ham arrived at Mr. Harper’s

residence, and Mr. Harper opened the door. Officer Ham said Mr. Harper’s appearance “was very

bloody, as if he had been beaten.” He said he asked Mr. Harper what happened and why he had not
-2-

called the police. He said Mr. Harper responded that he was not able to call the police. Officer Ham

said he then asked if the individual who had harmed Mr. Harper was still at the residence. He said

Mr. Harper nodded affirmatively. He stated that upon entering the residence, he saw blood, a

hammer, knives, and severed electrical cords scattered throughout the house. He said he found the

defendant in the back room and that the defendant appeared normal, having no visible injuries. He

said that when he searched the defendant, he found two crack pipes in the defendant’s front right

pocket. He said he arrested the defendant and left the residence in the same condition until

Investigator Allen Wilson arrived. On cross-examination, Officer Ham said the defendant never

talked to him. He stated that no crack cocaine was found at the residence.

Investigator Allen Wilson of the Covington Police Department testified that he arrived at Mr.

Harper’s residence at approximately 4:40 p.m. on January 29, 2001. He said the residence was in

disarray and blood was on the doorway. He said he found a hammer in the living room. He said he

found two cords, one from a fan and the other from a lamp at the residence. He said he found a knife

with duct tape around the handle. He said he also found a belt in the living room. He said he took

pictures of Mr. Harper’s bloody sock, bruised knee, hands, and neck, which appeared to have rope

burns around them. He stated he also took pictures of Mr. Harper’s head, which had a gash and a

dent. On cross-examination, he acknowledged not checking for fingerprints on the hammer, the

knife, or the crack pipes found on the defendant because the defendant and Mr. Harper were the only

two persons found in the house.

Mr. Harper testified that on the evening of January 28, 2001, the defendant struck him with

a hammer as Mr. Harper was leaving the bathroom. He said that there was no provocation and that

he did not know why the defendant struck him. He said he then lost consciousness. He stated that

when he regained consciousness, he was immobilized with his arms and legs tied together behind

his back and had duct tape across his mouth. He said the defendant beat him with a lamp and a

hammer while he was unable to move. He said the defendant also urinated on him several times.

He said that the following afternoon, he heard the police arrive after an alarm had sounded in the

neighborhood. He said the defendant then removed the binding and duct tape and told him that he

would kill everyone if he told the police anything. On cross-examination, Mr. Harper said he and

the defendant had smoked crack and marijuana the night before the incident took place. 

The defendant testified that he and Mr. Harper had been smoking crack cocaine from January

25, 2001, through January 28, 2001. He said that they began arguing over a stolen tractor and that

Mr. Harper picked up the hammer. The defendant said he then hit Mr. Harper with a statue that was

on a couch to prevent Mr. Harper from hitting him with the hammer. He said he hit Mr. Harper a

second time with a second statue to keep Mr. Harper from getting off the floor. He said he was

afraid Mr. Harper would overpower him if he allowed him to get up. He said he then tied up Mr.

Harper because he did not want to go to jail. He said that while Mr. Harper was restrained, he hit

him once in the leg with the hammer because he knew he would go to jail for this incident and that

made him angry. 
-3-

On cross-examination, he said he did not think he had the energy to leave the house after

hitting Mr. Harper with the first statue. He stated he believed that Mr. Harper would catch him if

he did not tie up Mr. Harper. He stated he did not leave after tying up Mr. Harper because he knew

he would go to jail when Mr. Harper called the police. He also stated that he owned one of the two

crack pipes and Mr. Harper owned the other. He said he had both pipes when the police arrived

because he was trying to smoke the residue while he had Mr. Harper restrained. He said he released

Mr. Harper two hours before the police arrived. The jury found the defendant guilty of aggravated

kidnapping, aggravated assault, and possession of drug paraphernalia.

The defendant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support his aggravated kidnapping

conviction. Specifically, he argues the state failed to prove the elements of aggravated kidnapping

because there is no testimony that the hammer was used during the kidnapping. Furthermore, the

defendant claims the jury should have accredited his testimony regarding self-defense because he

demonstrated through his statements that Mr. Harper was the aggressor. The state claims the

evidence is sufficient. We agree with the state.

Our standard of review when the defendant questions the sufficiency of the evidence on

appeal is “whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any

rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable

doubt.” Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319, 99 S. Ct. 2781, 2789 (1979). We do not reweigh

the evidence but presume that the jury has resolved all conflicts in the testimony and drawn all

reasonable inferences from the evidence in favor of the state. See State v. Sheffield, 676 S.W.2d

542, 547 (Tenn. 1984); State v. Cabbage, 571 S.W.2d 832, 835 (Tenn. 1978). Questions about

witness credibility were resolved by the jury. See State v. Bland, 958 S.W.2d 651, 659 (Tenn. 1997).

One commits aggravated kidnapping by falsely imprisoning another while the defendant is

in possession of a deadly weapon or threatens the use of a deadly weapon. Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-

13-304(a)(5). False imprisonment is the unlawful and knowing removal or confinement of another

“so as to interfere substantially with the other’s liberty.” Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-302.

We believe that the evidence is sufficient to support a conviction for aggravated kidnapping.

The evidence shows that the defendant used a hammer to incapacitate Mr. Harper which enabled the

defendant to tie Mr. Harper’s arms and legs together with electrical cords. Furthermore, the

defendant admits to striking Mr. Harper with the hammer while Mr. Harper’s arms and legs were

tied together. Thus, the evidence shows that the defendant falsely imprisoned the victim while in

possession of a deadly weapon. We recognize that the defendant’s testimony conflicts with Mr.

Harper’s statements. The jury, however, chose to believe the victim’s testimony. Therefore, viewed

in the light most favorable to the state, the evidence is sufficient. As to the defendant’s claim that

the jury failed to credit his claim of self-defense, the jury also chose to accredit the state’s theory of

the aggravated assault offense as is its prerogative.
-4-

Based upon the foregoing and the record as a whole, we affirm the judgments of conviction.

___________________________________ 

JOSEPH M. TIPTON, JUDGE