Solomon v. State

• Decision Date: 13 May 2022
• Docket Number: M2021-00739-CCA-R3-PC
• Parties: CHRISTOPHER C. SOLOMON v. STATE OF TENNESSEE
• Court: Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals

CHRISTOPHER C. SOLOMON
v.
STATE OF TENNESSEE

No. M2021-00739-CCA-R3-PC

Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee, Nashville

May 13, 2022

Assigned on Briefs March 15, 2022

Appeal from the Criminal Court for Sumner County Nos. 2019-CR-525, 2016-CR-832 Dee David Gay, Judge

The Petitioner, Christopher C. Solomon, pleaded guilty to aggravated vehicular homicide, aggravated vehicular assault, and leaving the scene of an accident resulting in death, and he received an effective thirty-three-year sentence. The Petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief, contending that he received ineffective assistance of counsel when trial counsel failed to seek the trial judge's recusal at sentencing. Following a hearing, the post-conviction court denied the petition, and the Petitioner appeals. After review, we affirm the judgment of the post-conviction court.

Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Criminal Court Affirmed

M. Allen Ehmling, Gallatin, Tennessee, for the appellant, Christopher C. Solomon.

Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; Benjamin A. Ball, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Ray Whitley, District Attorney General; and C. Ronald Blanton, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

John Everett Williams, P.J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which Robert H. Montgomery, Jr., and Timothy L. Easter, JJ., joined.

OPINION

JOHN EVERETT WILLIAMS, PRESIDING JUDGE

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

Guilty Pleas and Sentencing

In October 2016, the Petitioner, while driving under the influence, struck the victims, Mr. Robert Pyles and Ms. Dineen Cottrell, with his vehicle as they were walking

1

down the street. State v. Christopher C. Solomon, No. M2018-00456-CCA-R3-CD, 2018 WL 5279369, at *1 (Tenn. Crim. App. Oct. 23, 2018), no perm. app. filed. Mr. Pyles died as a result of his injuries, and Ms. Cottrell sustained serious injuries. Id. The Petitioner fled the scene, was found sitting in his vehicle heavily intoxicated, and repeatedly fell asleep during the interviews and the blood draw that followed. Id. The Petitioner was charged by indictment with aggravated vehicular homicide while having at least two prior convictions for driving under the influence ("DUI"), aggravated vehicular assault while having at least two prior DUI convictions, and leaving the scene of an accident resulting in death. Id. He pleaded guilty to the charges in the indictment with no agreement in place as to sentencing. Id.

The sentencing hearing transcript from October 2017 shows that Mr. Carson Bumbalough, a probation officer involved in the DUI court program, testified that the Petitioner entered the program in December 2013 after already having been provided treatment during a prior probationary sentence. Mr. Bumbalough stated that the Petitioner attended inpatient treatment for twenty-eight days and returned to complete the remainder of the program, which included classes for relapse prevention and drug and alcohol issues as well as "A.A. meetings," twelve-step meetings, meetings with the judge, and other activities. The Petitioner successfully completed the program, having only a "couple of issues," which Mr. Bumbalough stated were "not uncommon" in the program. Mr. Bumbalough stated that the Petitioner remained on probation following his completing the program due to consecutive sentences "from a previous probation and several charges." During Mr. Bumbalough's testimony, the trial judge, who also presided over the DUI court program, stated, "I didn't realize until this morning and I was looking through the warrants here that he was in our DUI Court program and successfully completed the program. This is a pretty big hit on the program." In response to the trial judge's questioning, Mr. Bumbalough testified that the Petitioner was treated for alcohol use initially but that issues relating to the Petitioner's drug use were also addressed during the program. He agreed that the program takes a year or more to complete and stated that the DUI and drug court programs "are the best, most intensive programs that I know of we have to offer in this County." Mr. Bumbalough indicated the Petitioner was the first person to complete the program who had subsequently been charged with an offense like vehicular homicide.

While making the court's factual findings, the trial judge cited the Petitioner's extensive treatment in the program as a factor in the court's sentencing decision. Specifically, the trial judge found that the program was not effective for the Petitioner, that he was not deterred after four prior DUI convictions, that his conduct was "a sad commentary on Drug Courts," and that the court was "very discouraged" that the Petitioner killed someone and "almost killed a second person" after completing the program. The trial judge cited the Petitioner's participation in the DUI court program

2

and other probationary sentences and found that "[t]he chances of rehabilitation are slim to none." Following the sentencing hearing, the trial judge imposed an effective thirty-three-year sentence and banned the Petitioner from driving for the duration of his life. Christopher C. Solomon, 2018 WL 5279369, at *5. On appeal, this court reversed the lifetime driving ban but otherwise affirmed the sentences. Id. at *8.

Post-Conviction

On May 10, 2019, the Petitioner filed a timely pro se petition for post-conviction relief, and he filed an amended petition on April 19, 2021, following the appointment of counsel. Among other...