State of Tennessee v. Pervis Tyrone Payne, W2022-00210-SC-R11-CD

Pervis Payne was convicted in 1988 of two counts of first-degree murder and one count of assault with intent to commit first-degree murder, and sentenced to death and 30 years, with sentences aligned consecutively.
Subsequent constitutional decisions held it unconstitutional to execute intellectually disabled individuals; Tennessee later established procedures allowing such inmates to seek intellectual disability determinations.
Payne was adjudicated intellectually disabled in 2022 under this new procedure, his death sentences vacated, and replaced with two life sentences.
The trial court also realigned his life sentences to run concurrently rather than consecutively, making him parole eligible sooner.
The State appealed solely the realignment, arguing the court lacked jurisdiction to change the final consecutive sentence alignment absent statutory authorization.
The Tennessee Supreme Court reviewed whether the trial court had authority to modify the alignment of Payne’s sentences after final judgment, post-intellectual disability adjudication.

Issue	Payne's Argument	State's Argument	Held
Trial court's authority to realign sentences after final judgment	Courts have broad sentencing discretion unless expressly forbidden; realignment allowed after intellectual disability finding	Courts cannot modify final judgments unless a statute or rule expressly authorizes; no authority to change sentence alignment granted	No authority; trial court lacked jurisdiction to modify alignment; only substitution of life sentences for death was permitted

Van Tran v. State, 66 S.W.3d 790 (Tenn. 2001) (execution of intellectually disabled persons violates constitutions)
Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (U.S. 2002) (execution of intellectually disabled violates federal constitution)
Payne v. Tennessee, 501 U.S. 808 (U.S. 1991) (victim impact evidence is permissible in capital sentencing)
State v. Pendergrass, 937 S.W.2d 834 (Tenn. 1996) (trial courts lose jurisdiction to modify judgment once final)
State v. Moore, 814 S.W.2d 381 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1991) (no authority to amend final judgment absent statute or rule)
Ray v. State, 576 S.W.2d 598 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1978) (final judgments generally not modifiable)