State v. Brittman

CourtSupreme Court of Tennessee
Writing for the CourtBROCK; FONES
Citation639 S.W.2d 652
PartiesSTATE of Tennessee, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Joe Davis BRITTMAN, Defendant-Appellee. 639 S.W.2d 652
Decision Date27 September 1982

Page 652

639 S.W.2d 652
STATE of Tennessee, Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
Joe Davis BRITTMAN, Defendant-Appellee.
639 S.W.2d 652
Supreme Court of Tennessee.
Sept. 27, 1982.

Gordon W. Smith, Asst. Atty. Gen., Nashville, for plaintiff-appellant; William M. Leech, Jr., Atty. Gen., Nashville, of counsel.

Joe B. Jones, Asst. Public Defender, Memphis, for defendant-appellee; A. C. Wharton, Jr., Shelby County Public Defender, Memphis, of counsel.

OPINION

BROCK, Justice.

The defendant had sexual intercourse with Vickie Jones, a female, who at the time was 10 years of age and who is the daughter of defendant's sister, Lillie Belle Jones. Based upon these facts as found by the jury, the defendant was convicted of two offenses, viz., aggravated rape, for which he received a sentence of 20 years in the penitentiary and incest for which he was sentenced to imprisonment of not less than five nor more than ten years in the penitentiary. The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed his conviction and sentence for rape but reversed his conviction for incest and dismissed that count of the indictment. We granted the appeal of the State to consider its contention that the Court of Criminal Appeals erred in concluding that convictions for both aggravated rape and incest could not properly be allowed to stand, based, as they were, upon the single act of intercourse.

We hold that the defendant was properly convicted of both aggravated rape and incest and that the Court of Criminal Appeals erred in reversing the conviction for incest.

In State v. Black, Tenn., 524 S.W.2d 913 (1975), this Court rejected the "same transaction" test for determining identity of offenses. We declined, however, to "attempt to formulate a rule to fit all possible situations," not finding the "formulation of the various 'tests' into catchwords, such as 'same transaction' or 'same evidence' ... particularly helpful." Instead, we held that:

"The cases, from their nature, have to be dealt with by analysis of the particular situations as they arise.

* * *

"[E]ach case requires close and careful analysis of the offenses involved, the statutory definitions of the crimes, the legislative intent and the particular facts and circumstances." 542 S.W.2d at 914, 919.

We have continued to adhere to the opinion and decision of Black. State v. Briggs,

Page 653

Tenn., 533 S.W.2d 290 (1976); State v. Campbell, Tenn., 549 S.W.2d 952 (1977); State v. Hudson, Tenn., 562 S.W.2d 416 (1978). Again, we reaffirm the principles stated in Black.

Nevertheless, in the course of our opinion in Black we quoted with approval the test for determining the identity of offenses which was articulated in Blockburger v. United States, 284 U.S. 299, 52 S.Ct. 180, 76 L.Ed. 306 (1932):

"Each of the offenses created requires proof of a different element. The applicable rule is that, where the same act or transaction constitutes a violation of two distinct statutory provisions, the test to be applied to determine whether there are two offenses or only one is whether...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 practice notes
  • State v. Stephenson
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Tennessee
    • May 9, 1994
    ...for Stephenson to be convicted of both first degree murder and conspiracy to commit first-degree murder. Cf. State v. Brittman, 639 S.W.2d 652, 653-54 B. Severance Next, Stephenson contends that the trial court erred in granting a severance of co-defendant Thompson's trial. The record on ap......
  • State v. Peyatt, No. 15799
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • December 15, 1983
    ...they arise from the same act, do not constitute the same offense for purposes of the double jeopardy clauses. See State v. Brittman, 639 S.W.2d 652 (Tenn.1982) (under Blockburger test convictions for aggravated sexual assault and incest arising out of same act not violative of double jeopar......
  • State v. Denton
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Tennessee
    • December 2, 1996
    ...support two separate assault convictions). A single act and single victim nevertheless justified two convictions in State v. Brittman, 639 S.W.2d 652 (Tenn.1982), because the elements of aggravated rape and incest were distinct and because the statutes served different one protects children......
  • State v. Stephenson, No. E2003-01091-CCA-R3-DD (TN 3/9/2005), No. E2003-01091-CCA-R3-DD.
    • United States
    • Tennessee Supreme Court
    • March 9, 2005
    ...for Stephenson to be convicted of both first degree murder and conspiracy to commit first-degree murder. Cf. State v. Brittman, 639 S.W.2d 652, 653-54 (Tenn. State v. Stephenson, 878 S.W. 2d 530, 538 (Tenn. 1994) (footnotes omitted). "Under the doctrine of the law of the case, when an initi......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
13 cases
  • State v. Stephenson
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Tennessee
    • May 9, 1994
    ...for Stephenson to be convicted of both first degree murder and conspiracy to commit first-degree murder. Cf. State v. Brittman, 639 S.W.2d 652, 653-54 B. Severance Next, Stephenson contends that the trial court erred in granting a severance of co-defendant Thompson's trial. The record on ap......
  • State v. Peyatt, No. 15799
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of West Virginia
    • December 15, 1983
    ...they arise from the same act, do not constitute the same offense for purposes of the double jeopardy clauses. See State v. Brittman, 639 S.W.2d 652 (Tenn.1982) (under Blockburger test convictions for aggravated sexual assault and incest arising out of same act not violative of double jeopar......
  • State v. Denton
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Tennessee
    • December 2, 1996
    ...support two separate assault convictions). A single act and single victim nevertheless justified two convictions in State v. Brittman, 639 S.W.2d 652 (Tenn.1982), because the elements of aggravated rape and incest were distinct and because the statutes served different one protects children......
  • State v. Stephenson, No. E2003-01091-CCA-R3-DD (TN 3/9/2005), No. E2003-01091-CCA-R3-DD.
    • United States
    • Tennessee Supreme Court
    • March 9, 2005
    ...for Stephenson to be convicted of both first degree murder and conspiracy to commit first-degree murder. Cf. State v. Brittman, 639 S.W.2d 652, 653-54 (Tenn. State v. Stephenson, 878 S.W. 2d 530, 538 (Tenn. 1994) (footnotes omitted). "Under the doctrine of the law of the case, when an initi......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT