STATE OF TENNESSEE v. TANDY TOMLIN, M2019-00274-CCA-R3-CD

Background:

Victim (born July 6, 2000) was 12 at the time of the offenses (2012–2013); Appellant Tandy Tomlin, a first cousin of the victim’s father, lived in the family mobile home and babysat the children.
Multiple incidents alleged: digital and penile penetration on the living-room couch; digital penetration at Barfield Park; two penile penetrations at the dead end of Lawrence Street; multiple incidents at the dead end of Suzanne Street including digital and penile contact and requests for oral/manual sex.
Victim delayed reporting (gave statement at Child Advocacy Center ~9–10 months later); family members (stepmother, stepgrandmother) testified about suspicious conduct, gifts, and witnessing inappropriate touching.
A Rutherford County jury convicted Tomlin on nine counts of rape of a child (later one count reduced on appeal), two counts of aggravated sexual battery, and two solicitation counts; trial court merged two rape counts and imposed consecutive maximum sentences yielding an effective 245-year term.
On appeal Tomlin challenged (1) sufficiency of evidence (especially as to one count), (2) sentencing (application of enhancement factors and consecutive service), and (3) claimed prejudice from being escorted into the courtroom in view of the jury pool.

Issues:

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for sexual offenses (esp. Count 7)	State: victim’s detailed testimony and corroborating family testimony sufficiently proved digital and penile penetrations and solicitation counts	Tomlin: inconsistencies, delayed reporting, and household/investigation facts undermine reliability	Court: affirmed convictions except reversed Count 7 (victim’s testimony showed only non‑penetrative digital contact); Count 7 reduced to aggravated sexual battery (10 years) as lesser included offense
Sentence length, enhancement factors, and consecutive service	State: enhancement factors (prior sexual conviction; offense to gratify sexual desire) and factors supporting consecutive sentences (multiple sexual offenses of a minor; position of trust) warrant maximum consecutive terms	Tomlin: trial court erred applying enhancement factor (7) to aggravated sexual battery and failed to explain why it applied to rape counts	Court: application of factor (7) to aggravated sexual battery was recognized as inapplicable but factor (1) (prior convictions) alone supports maximum terms; consecutive sentencing affirmed
Right to fair trial — escorted courtroom entrance visible to jury pool	State: Appellant entered unshackled, in street clothes through an unmarked door; presence of deputies is common and not inherently prejudicial	Tomlin: escort through secured door by uniformed deputy revealed incarceration and prejudiced jurors	Court: no prejudice shown; appearance (street clothes, unshackled) and courtroom security did not deprive Tomlin of fair trial

Key Cases Cited

Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (standard for sufficiency review)
State v. Bise, 380 S.W.3d 682 (Tenn. 2012) (abuse-of-discretion standard and presumptive reasonableness for sentencing)
State v. Itzol-Deleon, 537 S.W.3d 434 (Tenn. 2017) (treatment of lesser-included offenses in sexual-offense context)
State v. Qualls, 482 S.W.3d 1 (Tenn. 2016) (election doctrine when multiple incidents admitted)
State v. Kissinger, 922 S.W.2d 482 (Tenn. 1996) (sexual battery inherently involves gratification intent)
Holbrook v. Flynn, 475 U.S. 560 (1986) (presence of guards not necessarily prejudicial to defendant)
State v. Tuggle, 639 S.W.2d 913 (Tenn. 1982) (appellate deference to jury verdict)