Court Opinion

ID: 9684072
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 13:45:52.142269+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:17:52.600503
License: Public Domain

HARBISON, Justice,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent. In my opinion the majority of the Court of Criminal Appeals correctly interpreted the statute which prohibits consideration of probation for a defendant whose actual sentence is ten years or more. In my opinion the General Assembly had reference to the effective sentence imposed upon an accused, whether resulting from one or more offenses, and if that exceeded ten years the person should not be considered eligible for probation.
I agree that the sentence for each offense should be considered separately, and where concurrent sentences do not exceed ten years, and the accused is otherwise eligible, probation may be considered. Where sentences are made consecutive either by law or in the discretion of the trial judge, however, and where the consecutive sentences exceed ten years, then, in my opinion, the individual is no longer eligible for probation. The propriety of discretionary consecutive sentencing may, of course, be reviewed on appeal.
I would concur with the majority of the Court of Criminal Appeals in their interpretation of T.C.A. § 40-35-303(a).