Court Opinion

ID: 9764957
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 03:46:24.727808+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:30:02.788198
License: Public Domain

WILLIAM S. RUSSELL, Special Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part.
I concur in the affirmance of this conviction. I respectfully dissent from the reversal of the sentence imposed.
The majority hold that T.C.A. See. 40-35-106(b)(4) merges two prior felonies into one for later sentencing enhancement purposes when committed within a twenty-four hour period, even though one of them threatens bodily injury. In this ease the defendant was convicted for possessing cocaine with the intent to sell. Previously he had been convicted of receiving a stolen car, and of attempting to assault (run down) the officer arresting him. Those two crimes occurred on the same day.
The majority hold that one crime of violence or threatened violence within the twenty-four hour period does not defeat the merger provision, which is this case. They conclude that in another case when there is more than one previous act involving bodily injury or threatened bodily injury within a twenty-four hour period that there would be no merger for later sentencing purposes for a subsequent crime. In other words, one act of violence or threatened violence does not defeat merger, but two or more do.
While the pertinent statute does say “acts” resulting in bodily injury or threatened bodily injury to the victim or victims shall not be construed to be a single course of conduct, I understand this plural to be there because this rule is applicable to all cases at all times involving all defendants.
*737It seems clear to me that the prior offense of receiving stolen property counts as one prior felony conviction. Because the second offense committed the same day, the felonious assault upon a law officer, involved threatened bodily injury, that the exception to the merger rule attached and it constituted a second prior felony, as was held by the trial judge and is insisted by the State.
I would affirm the sentence.