State of Tennessee v. Henry Darnell Talley, M2016-01632-CCA-R3-CD

In 2013 Henry Darnell Talley entered a retail store where the mother of his child worked, shot her four times and wounded a co-worker; he fled but was arrested after shooting himself; victim suffered major injuries and PTSD.
Grand jury indicted Talley on attempted first-degree premeditated murder, employing a firearm during a dangerous felony, reckless aggravated assault, burglary, reckless endangerment, felon in possession of a weapon, and violation of an order of protection.
Talley was found initially incompetent, later entered a plea in June 2016: guilty pleas to multiple counts with sentencing for attempted first-degree murder left to the court and other counts carrying agreed concurrent/consecutive terms; agreed range for attempted murder was 18–23 years.
At sentencing the trial court relied on the presentence report, victim and eyewitness testimony, and medical/forensic records; applied multiple enhancement factors and limited mitigation for Talley’s bipolar diagnosis.
The trial court imposed the maximum negotiated 23-year sentence for attempted first-degree murder and partial consecutive sentences producing an effective 33-year term; Talley appealed as excessive.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the 23-year sentence for attempted first-degree murder is excessive	Sentence is within the negotiated 18–23 year range and supported by record and enhancement factors; trial court acted within discretion	Talley contends trial court misapplied enhancement factor (11) and should have applied mitigating factor (8) for mental illness; maximum within-range sentence is greater than deserved	Affirmed: within-range sentence, trial court considered sentencing principles, any misapplication of factors would not change result; no abuse of discretion

State v. Bise, 380 S.W.3d 682 (Tenn. 2012) (trial-court within-range sentences reviewed for abuse of discretion with presumption of reasonableness)
State v. Shaffer, 45 S.W.3d 553 (Tenn. 2001) (definition of abuse of discretion in sentencing review)
State v. Moore, 6 S.W.3d 235 (Tenn. 1999) (abuse-of-discretion standard discussion)
State v. Grear, 568 S.W.2d 285 (Tenn. 1978) (appellate review requires record support)
State v. Delp, 614 S.W.2d 395 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1980) (appellate review principles for sentencing)
State v. Ashby, 823 S.W.2d 166 (Tenn. 1991) (defendant bears burden to show sentence improper)
State v. Carter, 254 S.W.3d 335 (Tenn. 2008) (trial court’s weighing of enhancement and mitigating factors is discretionary)
State v. Taylor, 63 S.W.3d 400 (Tenn. Crim. App. 2001) (factors a trial court must consider at sentencing)