State of Tennessee v. Kimberly Mangrum
403 S.W.3d 152
| Tenn. | 2013Background
- Mangrum murdered LeeAnn Mangrum Smith; multiple superseding indictments; grand jury subpoena of AM and immunity; grand jury reconvened to hear AM; new charges including accessory after the fact against Terry Sr.; motions to suppress AM's testimony and dismiss indictments; trial convicted Mangrum on multiple counts.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Was the subpoena quashed for improper grand jury purpose? | Mangrum asserts dominant purpose to prepare for trial. | Mangrum contends district attorney sought discovery for pending charges. | No abuse; proper dominant purpose shown. |
| Did AM’s grand jury testimony and related proceedings constitute grand jury abuse? | Mangrum argues testimony was used to investigate pending charges. | State argues testimony aided grand jury duties and added charges. | Not abusive; proceedings within proper scope and regularity. |
| Were AM’s trial testimony suppression and indictments dismissal proper? | Mangrum claims due to abuse, suppression/dismissal warranted. | State shows legitimate grand jury purpose and consistent outcomes. | Denials upheld; presumption of regularity preserved; no reversible error. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Felts, 418 S.W.2d 772 (Tenn. 1967) (grand jury limits; screening function; determines probable cause)
- Harris v. State, 33 S.W.3d 767 (Tenn. 2000) (probable-cause and discretion; superseding indictments; grand jury authority)
- Sasso v. United States, 59 F.3d 341 (2d Cir. 1995) (dominant purpose test; pretrial preparation improper if sole/dominant purpose)
- Beale v. Grand Jury, 2 Sara Sun Beale et al., Grand Jury Law and Practice § 9:16 (n/a) (authoritative treatise; abuse remedy timing and scope guidance)
- Flemmi, 245 F.3d 24 (1st Cir. 2001) (absent dominant improper purpose, evidence obtained may be used at trial)