State of Tennessee v. Daniel Nesbit
W2016-00492-CCA-R3-CD
| Tenn. Crim. App. | Dec 8, 2017Background
- On Aug. 7, 2012 Jernario Taylor was shot and killed in his apartment; marijuana and packaging were present and one 9mm spent casing was recovered. Two men (identified at trial as Daniel Nesbit and Brandon Taliaferro) were seen in the apartment; Taliaferro’s prints and license were at the scene.
- Witnesses Mallorie Brown and Tarkeisha Jones testified they saw the men during the robbery/shooting; both later identified Nesbit at trial (with some inconsistencies in earlier descriptions and identification timing).
- Taliaferro’s girlfriend, Detricia Peeples, recorded a call in which Taliaferro allegedly implicated he and Nesbit and threatened Peeples to stay silent. The recording was played at trial subject to limiting rulings.
- Nesbit was arrested ~8 months later in Phenix City, Alabama; officers heard a gunshot and weapon-cycling during the arrest and found a 9mm handgun (stipulated not to have fired the casing found in Memphis). Nesbit resisted arrest and was tasered.
- A Shelby County jury convicted Nesbit of felony murder and attempted especially aggravated robbery; he received life plus a concurrent ten-year sentence. Nesbit appealed raising multiple trial and evidentiary claims; the Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | State's Argument | Nesbit's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Continuance granted ex parte for pregnant witness (Peeples) | Continuance justified by witness condition; no prejudice | Ex parte grant was improper and prejudicial | No reversible error; no shown prejudice |
| Brady/delayed disclosure of witness statements (Brown) and ID of Alabama officer | Disclosure timely or non-material; court offered continuance | Withheld exculpatory ID-description and officer identity—prejudiced defense | Brown’s description was Brady material but delay cured (defense declined continuance); no prejudice; Lahr’s ID not Brady |
| Admission of recorded phone call (hearsay / statement in furtherance) | Call admissible as declarations in furtherance of conspiracy and admissions | Recording hearsay and portions incriminating Nesbit inadmissible | Record incomplete on appeal; presumption trial court correct; no relief |
| Mistrial after Peeples testified to excluded content | Any erroneous testimony cured by curative instruction; State may not have elicited it | Testimony repeated excluded statement; warranted mistrial | No abuse of discretion; curative instruction and strength of proof weigh against mistrial |
| State argued inconsistent theories (other attempted homicide/alibi) | Not inconsistent; incidents ~1 hour apart; prosecutors may present evidence when uncertain | State argued mutually exclusive whereabouts; prevented Nesbit from introducing acquittal | No due process violation; acquittal of other charge irrelevant and inadmissible |
| Admission of Alabama arrest testimony (Sergeant Lahr) | Testimony based on personal observations; probative of guilty knowledge | Lahr lacked personal knowledge; prejudicial under Rule 403 | Admissible; personal knowledge shown; probative value not substantially outweighed by prejudice |
| Sufficiency of evidence for felony murder / attempted especially aggravated robbery | Identification, in-court testimony, Taliaferro’s admissions, flight, and resisting arrest support convictions | Witness inconsistencies and identification issues render evidence insufficient | Viewing evidence in State’s favor, rational juror could convict; convictions affirmed |
| Jury note / alleged ex parte communication during deliberations | Court instructed jurors to reread instructions; no prejudice | Trial court failed to notify defendant of jury question | Record unclear about content; defendant failed to show prejudice; no relief |
Key Cases Cited
- Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) (prosecution must disclose materially exculpatory evidence)
- Jencks v. United States, 353 U.S. 657 (1957) (production of witness statements after direct examination)
- United States v. Bagley, 473 U.S. 667 (1985) (materiality standard for nondisclosure; reasonable probability undermining confidence)
- Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for sufficiency of the evidence review)
- State v. Cabbage, 571 S.W.2d 832 (Tenn. 1978) (appellate review gives State strongest legitimate view of evidence)
- State v. Bland, 958 S.W.2d 651 (Tenn. 1997) (jury resolves witness credibility; appellate court won’t reweigh evidence)
- State v. Housler, 193 S.W.3d 476 (Tenn. 2006) (discussion of inconsistent prosecutorial theories and limits)
- State v. Morgan, 825 S.W.2d 113 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1991) (trial court’s discretion on continuances)