Skip to main content
· 6/5/2018

State of Tennessee v. Richard Lebron Madden, Sr.

Syllabus

The Defendant, Richmond Lebron Madden, Sr., was convicted by a jury of one count of possession of 0.5 grams or more of methamphetamine with intent to sell or deliver. On appeal, the Defendant contends that (1) the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support his conviction (2) the trial court erred in allowing a witness to testify about the Defendant's relationship with his co-defendant and his living arrangements (3) the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress, which challenged the legality of the stop resulting in the Defendant's arrest and (4) the trial court abused its discretion by denying the Defendant an alternative sentence and sentencing him to nine years and six months of incarceration.1 Following our review, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed and remanded for entry of a corrected judgment.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • explaining that “any gaps in the record cut against [a plaintiffs’ | claim,” but that plaintiffs are permitted to “patch” any such gaps
  • explaining “that what happened before the plan administrator is irrelevant in a de novo review case”
  • affirming district court’s conclusion that party forfeited argument when she provided “no explanation or argument” to support it
  • describing an ERISA plan administrator’s prior deci- sions as “irrelevant” once a covered employee seeks federal court review
  • issue waived where party “cited no legal authority and included only one sentence of justification in the fact section of her response brief”
  • “The court can limit itself to deciding the case on the admin- istrative record but should also freely allow the parties to introduce relevant extra-record evidence and seek appropriate discovery.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Judge D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.