State of Tennessee v. Dewayne Jones, W2016-00074-CCA-R3-CD

Defendant Dewayne Jones was arrested after a traffic stop and, during booking on May 21, 2012, struck Officer Leonard Bockhold in the face, knocking him unconscious; surveillance video and hospital records showed fractures, concussion, and severe pain.
Jones was indicted for aggravated assault (officer victim) and tried before a Shelby County jury in September 2015; the jury convicted him and assessed a $7,000 fine; the trial court sentenced him to five years as a Range I offender.
Prior to trial Jones filed a removal petition under 28 U.S.C. § 1443 seeking transfer of his state prosecutions to federal court; the petition was untimely and described by the federal district court as largely incomprehensible.
The federal district court remanded the case for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction under § 1443, noting the removal claims did not allege denial of rights under laws guaranteeing racial equality and that procedural defects existed.
On appeal Jones raised three issues: (1) state court lacked jurisdiction because of his pending removal petition; (2) insufficient evidence that the assault resulted in serious bodily injury; and (3) trial court erred by imposing the $7,000 fine without specific factual findings about ability to pay.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Jones)	Held
Jurisdiction after removal petition	Seaton controls: Jones’s untimely removal did not divest state court; state court retained jurisdiction	Late-filed §1443 removal petition divested state court of jurisdiction; trial, verdict, and judgment void	Affirmed: Under Sixth Circuit authority (Seaton), untimely removal without leave did not properly invoke federal jurisdiction; state court retained jurisdiction to try, sentence, and enter judgment
Sufficiency — serious bodily injury element	Victim’s testimony and medical records demonstrated extreme pain, concussion, and fractures satisfying serious bodily injury	Evidence insufficient; medical records did not establish “extreme physical pain” required for serious bodily injury	Affirmed: Viewing evidence in the light most favorable to the State, victim’s testimony of extreme pain, protracted unconsciousness, vomiting, and ongoing vertigo supported serious bodily injury
Fines — $7,000 assessed by jury	No objection at sentencing; defendant did not cooperate with presentence report; trial court did not abuse discretion imposing jury-assessed fine	Trial court erred by imposing fine without specific findings on financial circumstances and ability to pay	Affirmed: Defendant waived meaningful challenge by failing to object or provide financial information; court did not abuse discretion

Seaton v. Jabe, 992 F.2d 79 (6th Cir. 1993) (untimely criminal removal without leave does not divest state court of jurisdiction)
Page v. City of Southfield, 45 F.3d 128 (6th Cir. 1995) (civil removal procedural limits; district court cannot sua sponte dismiss on similar grounds in civil context)
State v. Farmer, 380 S.W.3d 96 (Tenn. 2012) (medical records alone insufficient to prove "extreme physical pain" for serious bodily injury)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (U.S. 1979) (standard for sufficiency review: whether any rational trier of fact could find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt)