State of Tennessee v. James Howard Harmon, Jr., E2019-02044-CCA-R3-CD

On June 20, 2011 a house fire revealed the body of Dilrea Sue Lett; autopsy showed she was shot to death before the fire and a toddler (J.L.) was later found abandoned in a car seat at a recovery center.
James Harmon (defendant) had been staying at the victim’s home; the victim’s car was later seen on Walmart surveillance driven by a man matching items recovered from a duffel and motel room tied to Harmon.
Harmon was arrested in Colorado; initial Colorado interviews included Miranda warnings, and he invoked his right to counsel on September 2, 2011.
Harmon was extradited to Tennessee and interviewed by Detective Trentham on April 10, 2012 after receiving fresh Miranda warnings; Trentham recorded that interview and used it at trial.
At trial the State introduced testimony that Harmon and others had made/detonated crude ‘‘bombs’’ days before the fire; Harmon was convicted of second-degree murder, especially aggravated kidnapping, arson, theft, and abuse of a corpse and sentenced to an effective 58 years.
On appeal Harmon challenged (1) admissibility of his April 10 statement (Fifth Amendment/Edwards) and (2) admission of 404(b) evidence about the prior bomb-making; the court affirmed convictions, rejecting suppression and deeming the 404(b) error harmless.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Harmon)	Held
Whether April 10, 2012 statement must be suppressed because Harmon previously invoked counsel	State: April 10 interview followed a sufficient break in custody; fresh Miranda warnings and waiver; statements admissible	Harmon: September 2 invocation of counsel barred further police-initiated interrogation under Edwards; April 10 interview was impermissible	Court: Denied suppression — Shatzer/Edwards analysis; defendant’s later incarceration and access to counsel/family created a sufficient break so April 10 waiver was valid
Whether testimony about prior bomb-making was admissible under Tenn. R. Evid. 404(b)	State: Bomb evidence showed knowledge/use of explosives, familiarity with flammables, and helped explain noises at scene	Harmon: Evidence was propensity evidence and irrelevant to material issues; 404(b) exclusion required	Court: Admission was erroneous (not probative of motive/origin) but harmless beyond a reasonable doubt; conviction affirmed

Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (establishing Miranda warnings and right to counsel for custodial interrogation)
Edwards v. Arizona, 451 U.S. 477 (police-initiated interrogation after invocation of counsel is presumptively involuntary)
Maryland v. Shatzer, 559 U.S. 98 (break-in-custody rule: confinement disconnected from interrogation can end Edwards presumption)
State v. Climer, 400 S.W.3d 537 (Tenn. 2013) (discussing Edwards presumption and custodial waiver principles in Tennessee)
State v. Thacker, 164 S.W.3d 208 (Tenn. 2005) (standards for admissibility of prior bad acts under Tenn. R. Evid. 404(b))