State v. Danny Spradlin
Tennessee Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ADOLPHO A. BIRCH, Jr., Justice.
I
We accepted review of this case in order to determine whether an agreement not to prosecute made between Danny Spradlin, the appellant, and two officers 1 is enforceable without the district attorney general’s 2 knowledge or approval. We conclude that a district attorney general has the sole duty, authority, and discretion to prosecute criminal matters in the State of Tennessee. 3 Police officers are, therefore, without authority to bind the district attorney general to an agreement not to prosecute. In this case, because the district attorney general…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- State v. OdomTennessee Supreme Court · 1996
- Commonwealth v. StipetichSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1995
- State v. HowingtonTennessee Supreme Court · 1995
- Tabor v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1998
- People v. GallegoMichigan Supreme Court · 1988
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- State v. HarrisTennessee Supreme Court · 2000
- Friends of George's, Inc. v. Steven MulroyCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2024
- State v. SiliskiCourt of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · 2007
- State v. RalstonCourt of Appeals of Kansas · 2010
- David G. Housler, Jr. v. State of TennesseeCourt of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · 2013
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.