State of Tennessee v. Reginold C. Steed, M2016-01405-CCA-R3-CD

Background

On Feb. 18, 2015, Reginold C. Steed shot Labrian Lyons multiple times at a Firehouse Subs parking lot; Lyons sustained serious wrist and leg injuries and the victim's car was later recovered in Jackson, TN with bullet damage and missing valuables.
Steed was indicted for attempted first-degree murder, especially aggravated robbery, carjacking, aggravated assault, and employment of a firearm during a dangerous felony; the State elected the victim's vehicle as the property taken for the robbery charge.
A jury convicted Steed of attempted voluntary manslaughter (lesser-included of attempted murder), especially aggravated robbery, and aggravated assault; acquitted on carjacking and the firearms-count; the trial court merged aggravated assault into especially aggravated robbery.
At sentencing the court applied multiple enhancement factors, declined mitigating factors, imposed within-range sentences (23 years for especially aggravated robbery; 4 years for attempted voluntary manslaughter) and ordered the two counts to run consecutively for an effective 27-year term, finding Steed an offender with an extensive criminal record and a dangerous offender.
On appeal Steed argued jury inconsistency, error in refusing to merge attempted voluntary manslaughter into the robbery conviction, and that his sentences (including admission of certain testimony at sentencing) were excessive or improper.

Issues

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (State)	Defendant's Argument (Steed)	Held
Whether inconsistent jury verdicts required relief	Verdicts stand; trial court acted as "thirteenth juror" and approved verdicts	Verdicts inconsistent (conviction for manslaughter vs. robbery) and thus against weight of evidence; new trial required	Affirmed — inconsistent verdicts are not a basis for relief; trial court presumed to have served as thirteenth juror and overruled new trial motion (no relief)
Whether attempted voluntary manslaughter should merge into especially aggravated robbery	Issue waived/inadequately briefed; State argued merger not required	Trial court erred by not merging the convictions (argued consecutive sentences/double jeopardy)	Waived for inadequate briefing/analysis; court did not grant relief on the merger claim
Whether sentencing court erred in admission of Mr. Govan's testimony at sentencing	Testimony relevant to criminal history and sentencing; properly admitted	Admission prejudicial; insufficient discovery and irrelevant pending-case testimony warrants resentencing	Waived for failure to timely object on the claimed ground; testimony deemed relevant to record of criminal activity; no reversible error
Whether sentence length and consecutive sentences were improper	Sentences within statutory ranges, enhancement factors appropriately applied, consecutive sentencing supported by statutory grounds (extensive criminal record; dangerous offender)	Misapplication of enhancement factors; failure to apply mitigators; consecutive sentences unnecessary/excessive	Affirmed — within-range sentences upheld; trial court properly applied enhancement factors and statutory bases for consecutive sentences, including Wilkerson findings that aggregate sentence related to offense severity and necessary to protect public

Key Cases Cited

State v. Carter, 896 S.W.2d 119 (Tenn.) (trial judge serves as thirteenth juror and may grant new trial when verdict weight is contrary to evidence)
State v. Blanton, 926 S.W.2d 953 (Tenn. Crim. App.) (discussion of thirteenth juror rule and new-trial standard)
State v. Moats, 906 S.W.2d 431 (Tenn.) (appellate review limited to sufficiency of evidence once trial court acts as thirteenth juror)
State v. Davis, 466 S.W.3d 49 (Tenn.) (inconsistent jury verdicts are not a basis for relief)
State v. Bise, 380 S.W.3d 682 (Tenn.) (standard and scope of appellate review for within-range sentences)
State v. Herron, 461 S.W.3d 890 (Tenn.) (abuse-of-discretion standard for sentencing review)
State v. Ashby, 823 S.W.2d 166 (Tenn.) (burden on appellant to show sentence improper)
State v. Pollard, 432 S.W.3d 851 (Tenn.) (standard for consecutive sentencing review and presumption of reasonableness)
State v. Wilkerson, 905 S.W.2d 933 (Tenn.) (when imposing consecutive sentences under "dangerous offender" the court must find aggregate sentence reasonably related to offenses' severity and necessary to protect the public)