State v. Troutt

Decision Date18 November 2022
Docket NumberM2021-01248-CCA-R3-CD
PartiesSTATE OF TENNESSEE v. AARON DEWAYNE TROUTT
CourtCourt of Appeals of Tennessee. Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee

STATE OF TENNESSEE
v.

AARON DEWAYNE TROUTT

No. M2021-01248-CCA-R3-CD

Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee, Nashville

November 18, 2022


Assigned on Briefs September 13, 2022

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Coffee County Nos. 42684, 42137 Vanessa A. Jackson, Judge

The Defendant, Aaron Dewayne Troutt, appeals as of right from the trial court's dismissal of his Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 36 motion to correct a clerical error. The Defendant contends that the trial court erred by concluding it was without jurisdiction to modify a final judgment to award behavioral and pretrial jail credit. After review, we affirm the trial court's decision in part, reverse in part, and remand for findings on whether a clerical error exists regarding the Defendant's pretrial jail credit.

Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Circuit Court Affirmed in Part; Reversed in Part; Case Remanded

Aaron Dewayne Troutt, Henning, Tennessee, Pro Se.

Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; Lindsay H. Sisco, Assistant Attorney General; Craig Northcott, District Attorney General; Jason Ponder, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

Kyle A. Hixson, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which James Curwood Witt, Jr., P.J., and Robert L. Holloway, Jr., J., joined.

OPINION

KYLE A. HIXSON, JUDGE

I. Factual and Procedural History

This appeal involves the amount of behavioral and pretrial jail credit due the Defendant following his guilty-pleaded convictions related to two sets of separate criminal incidents. In case number 42137 ("the criminal simulation case"), the Defendant was

1

arrested on June 12, 2015, for criminal simulation.[1] He posted bond and was released on July 14, 2015. Subsequently, the Defendant was placed in custody on this case and was released on October 13, 2015.[2] In case number 42684 ("the evading arrest case"), the Defendant was arrested on January 18, 2016, and charged with multiple drug and driving-related offenses.[3] The record before this court does not indicate that the Defendant posted bond on the evading arrest case, nor does it indicate whether his bond in the criminal simulation case was revoked as a result of his arrest in the evading arrest case. At some point following his January 2016 arrest, the Defendant was sent to the Tennessee Department of Correction ("TDOC") because, on April 18, 2018, the trial court ordered that the Defendant be returned from TDOC custody for a plea hearing on both cases in Coffee County on April 25, 2018. On April 25, 2018, the Defendant pleaded guilty to one count of criminal simulation in case number 42137 and to one count each of felony evading arrest and the lesser-included offense of simple possession of methamphetamine in case number 42684. The judgment in the criminal simulation case awarded the Defendant pretrial jail credit from June 12, 2015, to July 14, 2015, and from October 7, 2015, to October 13, 2015. The judgment further indicated that the sentence ran consecutively to "all sentences previously imposed and [to] Coffee County case [42684.]" The judgments in the evading arrest case contained no pretrial jail credit, nor did the prosecutor announce that the Defendant was entitled to any credit at the guilty plea hearing. The judgment for the felony evading arrest conviction indicated that the sentence ran consecutively to "all sentences previously imposed and Coffee County case [sic][.]" There was no discussion at the plea hearing in either case concerning pretrial jail credit for the period from January 18, 2016, to April 25, 2018.

On June 25, 2021, the Defendant filed a pro se motion to correct a clerical error pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure 36. He argued that the trial court failed to award him behavioral credit and pretrial jail credit for the criminal simulation case and the evading arrest case for his time in custody from January 18, 2016, to April 25, 2018. The trial court, citing Barabbas A. Brown v. State[4] and the Uniform Administrative Procedures Act ("UAPA"),[5] summarily dismissed the Defendant's motion, stating that it "was without jurisdiction to order a modification of the final judgment for this [TDOC] inmate." This timely appeal followed.

2

II. Analysis

The Defendant contends the trial court erred when it summarily dismissed his Rule 36 motion on jurisdictional grounds. He argues that the trial court had jurisdiction to correct his judgments for both the criminal simulation conviction and the evading arrest conviction to reflect his earned behavioral and pretrial jail credit. He further argues that the trial court abused its discretion by failing to exercise its jurisdiction to correct his judgments. The State contends the trial court correctly ruled that it did not have jurisdiction to address the Defendant's behavioral credit. Further, the State argues that the Defendant has not shown that he is entitled to Rule 36 relief regarding his pretrial jail credit. We agree with the State regarding the behavioral credit issue but conclude that the trial court erred by determining that...

To continue reading

Request your trial

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