State v. Bailes
| Docket Number | E2022-00741-CCA-R3-CD |
| Decision Date | 06 June 2023 |
| Parties | STATE OF TENNESSEE v. PAUL TRACY BAILES |
| Court | Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals |
Assigned on Briefs May 23, 2023
Appeal from the Criminal Court for Hamilton County, Nos. 298063 299250, 303028, 303274, 306566 Thomas C. Greenholtz, Judge
The Defendant, Paul Tracy Bailes, appeals from the Hamilton County Criminal Court's probation revocation of the fourteen-year split-confinement sentence he received for his guilty-pleaded convictions for forgery, two counts of theft of property, and two counts of attempted possession of methamphetamine for resale. On appeal, the Defendant contends that the trial court abused its discretion in revoking his probation, rather than permitting him to participate in the mental health court program. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.
Tenn R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Criminal Court Affirm
Jessica F. Butler (on appeal), Assistant Public Defender - Appellate Division; Steven Smith (at hearing), District Public Defender; and Anna Marcona (at hearing), Assistant District Public Defender, for the appellant, Paul Tracy Bailes.
Jonathan Skrmetti, Attorney General and Reporter; Courtney N. Orr, Senior Assistant Attorney General; Coty G. Wamp, District Attorney General; and Colin Campbell, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.
Robert.
OPINION
Four of the Defendant's convictions resulted from his May 24, 2018 guilty pleas, at which time he received an effective fourteen-year, split-confinement sentence, with eleven months and twenty-nine days to be served and the balance on probation. On December 18, 2018, the Defendant committed a new offense, and he was convicted of a Class D felony attempted theft upon his guilty plea on August 1, 2019. He was sentenced to two years' probation, to be served concurrently to the sentences in the previous cases. He also pleaded guilty to a probation violation charge which was based upon his commission of the December 18, 2018 offense, and the court revoked his probation, ordered him to serve a two-year sentence, and returned him to probation for the remainder of the fourteen-year sentence.
On May 5, 2020, a probation violation report was generated on the basis of the Defendant's arrest for new offenses alleged to have been committed on May 1. On May 26, a capias was issued for the Defendant based upon the violation report. The capias specified that the Defendant was charged with attaining a new arrest, failing to report the new arrest, and failure to pay restitution. The record reflects that the Defendant's new criminal charges were related to his high-speed motor vehicle flight from police officers and his subsequent interaction with them.
At the May 5, 2022 revocation hearing, the trial court observed that the Defendant had pending charges of aggravated assault, assault on police officers, resisting arrest, reckless endangerment, possession of methamphetamine, and possession of drug paraphernalia, and that the Defendant was alleged to have failed to pay restitution. The parties agreed that the Defendant had been in custody since May 2020, except for times when he had been released to another county and to another state due to holds placed upon him.
Probation and Parole Officer Christina Barnes testified that the violation report alleged that the Defendant had violated four rules of probation: he was arrested on new charges; he failed to report the arrest; he possessed methamphetamine; and he failed to pay restitution. She stated that the Defendant had been on probation, had reported as required, and had passed drug screens from June 2018 until January 2019 and from December 2019 until April 2020. She agreed that her office had not had any interaction with the Defendant since April 2020. She later agreed that the Defendant had not reported as instructed twice in January 2019. She stated that she had no record of any restitution payments. She said the Probation and Parole Office learned of the Defendant's May 1, 2020 arrest when a probation officer visited the Defendant's home and learned from the Defendant's mother of the arrest. She said probationers sometimes called the probation office from jail in order to report an arrest.
Hamilton County Sheriff's Department (HCSD) Deputy Aaron Cameron testified that in the early morning hours of May 1, 2020, he was on duty as a patrol officer when he came upon the Defendant slumped over the steering wheel of a parked car on the side of the road. He said that what he thought was "a pretty sizable amount of methamphetamine" was visible in a small plastic bag in the car's passenger seat. He said he called for backup and put "spike strips" in front of the Defendant's car to puncture the tires in the event the Defendant woke and tried to flee. Deputy Cameron said that when backup officers arrived, they opened the driver's door in order to wake the Defendant to determine if he needed medical treatment, but that the Defendant woke, immediately reached for his gear shift, and drove away. Deputy Cameron did not recall if he had identified himself when he attempted to enter the car to check on the Defendant. Deputy Cameron said the Defendant drove over the spike strips, causing his car's tires to deflate.
Deputy Cameron testified that he activated his blue lights and siren and that he followed the Defendant in a "very dangerous" pursuit, in which the Defendant reached speeds in excess of 100 miles per hour and drove erratically with shredded tires. Deputy Cameron noted that sparks flew from the contact of the Defendant's car's wheels with the road. Deputy Cameron said the Defendant drove more than twice the speed limit through residential areas, drove on the wrong side of the road for most of the pursuit, did not heed traffic signs or red lights, and hit a couple of signs. Deputy Cameron described part of the route as a narrow, curvy, two-lane road with hills and no shoulder. He said the Defendant stopped after becoming "boxed in" on a dead-end street. Deputy Cameron did not recall how many patrol cars were involved in the chase but said they all had their blue lights and sirens activated.
Deputy Cameron testified that several officers approached the Defendant's car. Deputy Cameron said the Defendant had a sheathed knife on his belt loop and that the officers who were in the process of detaining the Defendant "felt him reaching for that knife."
Deputy Cameron testified that the suspected methamphetamine he had seen in the car before the pursuit was not recovered when the car was searched after the pursuit. He said a gallon Ziploc bag was found in the glove box[1] but that it was not the same bag he had seen with the suspected methamphetamine. He said several syringes were found in the Defendant's car. He said that he had been far enough behind the Defendant at times during the pursuit that it would have been difficult to see if the Defendant threw something out the window.
Deputy Cameron identified a disc containing the dashboard camera video recording of the incident, and the disc was received as an exhibit.
When asked to review the video recording and asked if any of the officers identified themselves as police officers, Deputy Cameron stated that due to the poor quality of the audio, he "couldn't make out any words." He identified on the recording the location when he "saw some items leaving the [Defendant's] vehicle."
We have reviewed the recording, and its contents are consistent with Deputy Cameron's testimony. The recording reflects that the car emitted exhaust fumes before the officers approached it, from which we infer that the car's engine was running. The officers who approached the Defendant's car to check on him before the chase were uniformed, and the chase lasted almost twelve minutes. The record also shows that the Defendant ran a red light at an intersection and that a gas station with its lights illuminated sat at the corner of the intersection.
Teresa Brinkley, the Defendant's sister, testified for the defense that the Defendant had been a patient at psychiatric facilities as a child. She said he had taken clonidine and Ritalin. She said she had learned from their mother that the Defendant had diagnoses of bipolar disorder and schizophrenia, and she said he began "getting into a lot of trouble around age twelve or thirteen." She acknowledged that her mother had been unable to locate any "paperwork" related to the Defendant's mental health diagnoses. She said that after the Defendant began taking medication during his childhood, his "attitude and everything" improved but that he remained "a little rebellious." She said that once the Defendant was in his 20s and started his own business, he "was okay." She acknowledged that she and the Defendant had not been close as children but that they were now.
Ms. Brinkley testified that the Defendant's wife gave birth in 2011, that she left the Defendant because she "couldn't deal with it," that the Defendant adopted the child, that the Defendant "was not hi[m]self" behaviorally, and that the Defendant lost his business. Ms. Brinkley said that the Defendant's daughter now lived part-time with Ms. Brinkley and her mother.
Ms. Brinkley testified that her boyfriend would employ the Defendant if the Defendant were released on probation and that the Defendant could live with her or their mother. Ms. Brinkley said she and her mother were prepared to "keep him on that road to get help."
Ms Brinkley testified that she did not think the Defendant had intentionally violated...
To continue reading
Request your trial