12 Tennessee opinions name it 3 courts 1934–2025 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Tennessee courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Board of Professional Responsibility Of The Supreme Court of Tennessee v. Michael Gibbs Sheppardgreen2 sentences2020For that reason, “where reasonable minds can disagree over the propriety of a hearing panel’s decision, we will uphold the ruling.” Bd. of Prof’l Responsibility v. Sheppard, 556 S.W.3d 139, 146 (Tenn. 2018) (citing Sallee, 469 S.W.3d at 42 ). 2019For that reason, “where reasonable minds can disagree over the propriety of a hearing panel’s decision, we will uphold the ruling.” Bd. of Prof’l Responsibility v. Sheppard, 556 S.W.3d 139, 146 (Tenn. 2018) (citing Sallee, 469 S.W.3d at 42 ). - 10 - Presumptive Sanction After a hearing panel finds one or more grounds for discipline, it must consider the applicable ABA Standards to determine the appropriate sanction for the attorney’s misconduct. | 2 | 2 |
State v. Cautherngreen2 sentences2000We have previously addressed this issue in State v. Cauthern, 967 S.W.2d 726, 734-36 (Tenn.1998), in which we first held that the statutory language prohibited a jury from considering life without the possibility of parole as a sentencing option where the offense was committed before July 1, 1993. 2000We have previously addressed this issue in State v. Cauthern, 967 S.W.2d 726 , 734- 36 (Tenn. 1998), in which we first held that the statutory language prohibited a jury from considering life without the possibility of parole as a sentencing option where the offense was committed before July 1, 1993. | 1 | 2 |
State v. Paytongreen1 sentence2013Sufficient evidence to support such an instruction requires “both a leaving the scene of the difficulty and a subsequent hiding out, evasion or concealment within the community.” State v, Burns, 979 S.W.2d 276, 289-90 (Tenn. 1998) (quoting State v. Payton, 782 S.W.2d 490, 498 (Tenn. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Burnsgreen1 sentence2013Sufficient evidence to support such an instruction requires “both a leaving the scene of the difficulty and a subsequent hiding out, evasion or concealment within the community.” State v, Burns, 979 S.W.2d 276, 289-90 (Tenn. 1998) (quoting State v. Payton, 782 S.W.2d 490, 498 (Tenn. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Berrygreen1 sentence2013In denying relief on this issue, the trial court cited the relevant law on the propriety of the instruction and offered the following statements about whether trial counsel were ineffective: “In order for a trial court to charge the jury on flight as an inference of guilt, there must be sufficient evidence to support such instruction.” State v. Berry, 141 S.W.3d 549, 588 (Tenn. 2004). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Tennessee. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Yarboro Sallee v. Tennessee Board of Professional Responsibility
green
2 sentences2020For that reason, “where reasonable minds can disagree over the propriety of a hearing panel’s decision, we will uphold the ruling.” Bd. of Prof’l Responsibility v. Sheppard, 556 S.W.3d 139, 146 (Tenn. 2018) (citing Sallee, 469 S.W.3d at 42 ). 2019For that reason, “where reasonable minds can disagree over the propriety of a hearing panel’s decision, we will uphold the ruling.” Bd. of Prof’l Responsibility v. Sheppard, 556 S.W.3d 139, 146 (Tenn. 2018) (citing Sallee, 469 S.W.3d at 42 ). - 10 - Presumptive Sanction After a hearing panel finds one or more grounds for discipline, it must consider the applicable ABA Standards to determine the appropriate sanction for the attorney’s misconduct. | 3 | 2018–2020 |
State v. Edison
green
2 sentences2002Edison, 9 S.W.3d at 77 . 2000Id. | 2 | 2000–2002 |
Kersey v. State
green
1 sentence2025In so doing, he asserts that the jury was deadlocked and should therefore have been given the specific unanimity instruction promulgated by the Tennessee Supreme Court in Kersey, 525 S.W.2d at 145 . | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Dennis J. Hughes v. Board of Professional Responsibility of the Supreme Court of Tennessee
green
1 sentence2020A hearing panel’s decision is arbitrary or capricious when it “‘is not based on any course of reasoning or exercise of judgment, or . . . disregards the facts or circumstances of the case without some basis that would lead a reasonable person to reach the same conclusion.’” Hughes, 259 S.W.3d at 641 (quoting City of Memphis v. Civ. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
State v. Scott
green
1 sentence2018Sallee , 469 S.W.3d at 42 (quoting State v. Scott, 33 S.W.3d 746 , 752 (Tenn. 2000) ). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
State v. White
green
1 sentence2017Id. at 580-81 . | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Braverman v. Roberts Construction Co.
green
1 sentence1999The only case in our jurisprudence addressing the propriety of hearing de novo appeals where less than all of the general sessions parties suffering adverse judgments have perfected appeal to the circuit court is Braverman v. Roberts Const. Co., Inc. 748 S.W.2d 433 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1987). | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Brasfield v. United States
green
2 sentences1934Brasfield v. U. S., 272 U. S., 448 , 47 S. Ct., 135 , 71 L. 1934Brasfield v. U. S., 272 U. S., 448 , 47 S. Ct., 135 , 71 L. | 1 | 1934–1934 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.