State of Tennessee v. Brandon Deshun McAlister, W2020-00651-CCA-R3-CD

Background:

Defendant Brandon McAlister was indicted in Madison County for especially aggravated kidnapping, two counts of aggravated assault (including strangulation and use of a firearm), and unlawful possession of a firearm by a person previously convicted of a misdemeanor domestic-violence offense, based on injuries to victim Faith Carter in November 2018.
Police body-camera footage and hospital examinations documented extensive bruising, burns (including inside the mouth and near the pelvis), a human bite, neck-striations consistent with choking, and other severe injuries; the victim told officers McAlister choked her, held a gun to her head, and burned her with cigarettes and a makeshift blowtorch.
The victim directed officers to a Smith & Wesson .40 found in a dresser drawer after her hospital release; the defendant acknowledged previously owning such a firearm but said he had sold it.
The victim later signed two notarized letters recanting and asking that charges be dropped; the letters lacked a jurat (no oath) and were not sworn statements.
The jury convicted McAlister of two counts of aggravated assault and one count of unlawful possession of a firearm and acquitted him of especially aggravated kidnapping; he appealed challenging only the sufficiency of the evidence, arguing the victim’s later letters rendered the evidence insufficient.
The trial included expert testimony on trauma bonds/domestic-violence victim dynamics; the jury credited the State’s evidence (including hospital records, officers’ testimony, and the victim’s pretrial statements) and convicted; the Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed.

Issues:

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of the evidence given victim's later statements	State: evidence (injuries, victim's statements, recovered firearm, defendant's admissions) sufficient to support convictions	McAlister: victim’s notarized letters recanting show insufficient evidence for convictions	Affirmed — evidence, viewed in State’s favor, supports convictions beyond a reasonable doubt
Legal effect of the victim’s notarized letters	State: letters are not dispositive; jury may weigh credibility against other evidence	McAlister: letters are “sworn statements” that undermine the State’s case	Court: letters lacked a jurat and were not sworn statements; they did not override other admissible evidence or jury credibility determinations
Admissibility / weight of victim’s prior statements and investigatory statement	State: victim’s statements to officers and written statement to investigator were admissible and probative; jury decides credibility	McAlister: (implicitly) later recantation diminishes probative value	Court: trial court properly presented evidence; jury, as factfinder, credited State’s evidence; appellate court will not reweigh credibility

Key Cases Cited

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (established the constitutional standard for appellate review of sufficiency of the evidence)
State v. Dorantes, 331 S.W.3d 370 (Tenn. 2011) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of the evidence in Tennessee)
State v. Cabbage, 571 S.W.2d 832 (Tenn. 1978) (jury as judge of credibility; appellate court will not reweigh evidence)
D.T. McCall & Sons v. Seagraves, 796 S.W.2d 457 (Tenn. Ct. App. 1990) (distinguishing jurat from acknowledgment/notarization)