State v. Somerville

STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JESSIE JAMES SOMERVILLE, IV

No. W2020-00105-CCA-R3-CD

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON

Assigned on Briefs March 2, 2021

March 29, 2021

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Lauderdale County

No. 10479

Joe H. Walker, III, Judge

Defendant, Jessie James Somerville, IV, was indicted by the Lauderdale County Grand Jury for one count of premeditated first degree murder and one count of felony reckless endangerment. Defendant entered no contest pleas to second degree murder and felony reckless endangerment. On the day of Defendant's scheduled sentencing hearing, Defendant made an oral motion to withdraw his pleas, which the trial court took under advisement and subsequently denied by written order. Following a sentencing hearing, the trial court sentenced Defendant as a Range I standard offender to serve concurrent sentences of 22 years for his second degree murder conviction and one year for his felony reckless endangerment conviction. In this appeal as of right, Defendant contends that the trial court erred by denying his motion to withdraw his pleas and that his sentence is excessive. Having reviewed the entire record and the briefs of the parties, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgments of the Trial Court Affirmed

TIMOTHY L. EASTER, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which JAMES CURWOOD WITT, JR., and J. ROSS DYER, JJ., joined.

Bryan R. Huffman, Covington, Tennessee, for the appellant, Jesse James Somerville, IV.

Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; Edwin Alan Groves, Jr., Assistant Attorney General; Mark E. Davidson, District Attorney General; and Julie Pillow, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee.

OPINION

Factual and Procedural Background

On September 30, 2019, the day Defendant's trial was scheduled to begin, Defendant entered no contest pleas¹ to second degree murder and felony reckless endangerment. The State offered the following factual basis for Defendant's pleas:

[O]n November 27, 2015, there was a Thanksgiving party at Keeley's Club and shots rang out at 2:12, and Mr. Samuel Andrew Johnson was shot and killed. It was a close-range-near-contact bullet wound to the back, and he died on scene.

During the course of the investigation, [the] TBI was given information that [Defendant] was stopped in Shelby County, and during the follow-up with regard to that, he was stopped with a weapon. They recovered the weapon, and they did ballistics examination with the weapon and the bullet that was recovered from the victim and that did match. So [Defendant] was in possession of the murder weapon. And I believe that stop occurred December 22, 2015, so a few short weeks after.

[Defendant] was interviewed at the Tipton County interview room. That was video and audio recorded. At that time he gave a statement placing himself in close proximity to the victim but sta[t]ed that Logan Brown was the one that actually shot the victim, and it was Logan Brown's gun that he had at the time of the stop.

However, there was video at Keeley's Club that night, and we were able to review video and were able to discredit numerous facts that [Defendant] had put in that statement. One being that he stated that Logan Brown and he rode to the club together, and it is very apparent that they did not. Based on the video recordings that they arrived separately and with a pretty substantial time gap.

The video would have also shown [Defendant] leaving the club, going out to a vehicle, [and] coming back in. We believe that that was when he retrieved this weapon. He walked around the metal detector, was stopped, was made to walk through the metal detector, which lit up like a Christmas tree, and then was given a very minor pat-down. And then moments later,he was standing beside the victim, and that's when we believe that he fired the fatal shot.

Shortly after giving the statement where [Defendant] put the gun in Logan Brown's hand, he sent out a grievance form basically stating, I got to talk to you about what we just talked about. It was self-defense, knives was [sic] involved. I'm taking my charge. I am still cooperating. Which the State would have argued at trial, it's not a self-defense when you shoot someone in the back, that that's a knowing killing.

Lastly, there would have been testimony from other witnesses that were at the club that would have stated that they did see [Defendant] fire the shot. And that person was here and willing to give testimony.

Upon questioning by the trial court, Defendant indicated that he understood the charges against him, the range of punishment for the offenses, his right to plead not guilty and proceed to trial, his right to confront and cross-examine witnesses, and his right against compelled self-incrimination. Defendant acknowledged that he signed a waiver of his right to a jury trial. The trial court informed Defendant that "[t]he witnesses are here, the jury is in another room, and the matter was set for trial today. However, by going through this proceeding, there will not be a trial by jury and will not be an appeal. This is your day in court." Defendant responded, "Yes, sir, I understand."

The trial court explained to Defendant that he was entering no contest pleas to the lesser-included offense of second degree murder, which carried a sentence of 15 to 25 years with 100 percent service, and to felony reckless endangerment, which carried a sentence of one to two years with 30 percent service. The trial court asked Defendant whether he felt he had sufficient time to discuss his case with his trial counsel, and Defendant responded, "[h]onestly I do not feel like I had enough time, but we should proceed, I guess." Defendant stated that he was satisfied with his counsel's representation but that he had "very brief" discussions with trial counsel because Defendant was incarcerated "all the way in Morgan County, Wartburg, so [they] ha[d]n't had that much time to just really go over some things." The trial court accepted Defendant's pleas and scheduled a sentencing hearing.

At the outset of the November 15, 2019 sentencing hearing, defense counsel announced to the trial court that Defendant wished to withdraw his pleas. Upon questioning by defense counsel, Defendant testified that he had not "had enough time" and that he "really want[ed] the position to explain [him]self in this matter, prove [his] innocence." Defendant acknowledged that he was facing a potential life sentence if his motion was granted and his case proceeded to trial. The trial court took Defendant's motionunder advisement and subsequently entered an order denying the motion and resetting Defendant's sentencing hearing.

The trial court conducted a sentencing hearing on December 19, 2019. A presentence report was admitted into evidence, and several witnesses testified. Matt Pugh, a special agent with the Tennessee Bureau of Investigation, testified that while Defendant's case was pending, several witness statements were posted on Facebook. Agent Pugh testified that discovery was provided to Defendant through defense counsel, and the discovery materials contained statements by witnesses of the shooting. Agent Pugh learned that the witnesses' statements had been posted on Facebook by members of the "Kitchen Crip" gang, with which Defendant was affiliated, and there were monitored communications between Defendant and other gang members regarding the witnesses "being snitches." According to Agent Pugh, one of the witnesses, whose statement was posted on Facebook, was "shot at" and another was "shot and killed" after the shooting at Keeley's Club. Agent Pugh investigated the Facebook postings as witness intimidation.

Brenda Johnson, the victim's mother, testified that the victim was 25 years old at the time he was killed. She testified that the victim had been home to celebrate Thanksgiving and his upcoming birthday at the time of the shooting. The victim worked at Nissan in Smyrna, and he had served in the military. Ms. Johnson read an impact statement expressing her grief over her son's murder. Other friends and family members of the victim also testified and gave victim impact statements. They described the victim as "ambitious" and "full of life."

Defendant's father testified that Defendant "was not raised to be [in] a gang." Defendant's father and grandfather had both served as the pastor of their church. Defendant's father described him as "a gifted individual" who "got off track." Defendant's mother testified that Defendant was generous and that he "just had a way with people. Everybody who hung around, liked him." She testified that Defendant was bullied as a child. Defendant's parents sought help for Defendant but, his mother testified, "[e]ventually, [they] just couldn't do anything."

Defendant made a statement in allocution. Defendant stated that he "wish[ed] to be a positive influence from this point on." He stated that he wanted an opportunity "to give the message, you know, or kind of try to help our younger people today, you know, how being involved with the wrong crowd, you know, can't get side tracked." Defendant expressed his sympathy for the victim's family, stating "my heart does - it does truly go out to the families. I wish - I really do wish the truth could be seen clearly, but I guess in due time, it's all in God's plan."

At the conclusion of the sentencing hearing, the trial court considered the factual basis for the pleas and the evidence presented at the sentencing hearing. The trial court observed, "[t]he [c]ourt is sorry for the true tragedy this is for both families." The trial court also considered the presentence report, which indicated that Defendant "had a similar conviction out of Tipton County, Docket Number 8302, for attempt to commit first degree murder" and that Defendant "was on probation at the time of this killing." Considering the nature and characteristics of the...