State of Tennessee v. James William Mabe, M2016-02096-CCA-R3-CD

Defendant James William Mabe convicted by Warren County jury of three counts each of attempted rape of a child and aggravated sexual battery; merged attempted rape counts into aggravated sexual battery for sentencing, with an effective 22-year sentence at 100% service; charging indicted Counts 1–6 with two offenses per incident and prosecutors argued multiple incidents over time; testimony and forensic interviews from the victim and witnesses detailed three sexual incidents at different locations and times; victim was eight years old at trial; defense health issues and prior family arrangements relevant to care during the incidents; trial judge instructed jury on counts but the record showed no explicit election of offenses; on appeal, Mabe argued insufficiency of evidence, improper election, lack of lesser included offense instruction, and excessive sentencing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence to support convictions	Mabe argues the victim's inconsistent statements undermine proof	Mabe contends evidence insufficient and election flawed	Evidence sufficient; convictions affirmed
Election of offenses	State must elect which offense it relies on for each incident	No written election or instruction; issues lack clarity	Election unnecessary here; jury unanimity ensured by instructions; no reversible error
Lesser included offense instruction for aggravated sexual battery	Aggravated sexual battery should be included as lesserIncluded offense to rape of a child	Failure to request written instruction; plain error review	Issue waived for failure to pursue in motion; no plain error found; no relief granted
Sentencing enhancements	Court abused discretion by enhancing without explicit findings	Sentence within statutory range and justified by factors; no abuse shown	Eleven-year within-range sentences affirmed; consecutive sentence upheld; no merit to challenge on this basis

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for sufficiency of evidence)
State v. Vasques, 221 S.W.3d 514 (Tenn. 2007) (definitive sufficiency framework in Tennessee)
State v. Bland, 958 S.W.2d 651 (Tenn. 1997) (credibility and weight resolved by trier of fact; appellate reweighing disfavored)
State v. Shelton, 851 S.W.2d 134 (Tenn. 1993) (election requirements protect against patchwork verdicts; unanimity concerns)
State v. Adams, 24 S.W.3d 289 (Tenn. 2000) (election-related necessity and sufficiency considerations for multiple offenses)