Legal Opinion

Ruff v. State

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided September 28, 1998No. 03S01-9711-CC-00140PublishedCited by 452 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

BIRCH, Justice.

We granted the appellants, George Ruff and Billy Joe Smith, permission to appeal and consolidated their cases to address the validity of indictments that failed to charge a specific culpable mental state. For the reasons set forth herein, under the controlling case of State v. Hill, 954 S.W.2d 725 (Tenn.1997), we hold that the indictments are sufficient. Accordingly, the convictions resulting from these indictments are valid.

In addition to the above issue, each appellant raises a separate second issue. Ruff contends that the testimony of a Department of Human Services…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Ake v. OklahomaSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  2. State v. HillTennessee Supreme Court · 1997
  3. State v. DavisTennessee Supreme Court · 1997
  4. State v. BarnettTennessee Supreme Court · 1995
  5. State v. LivingstonTennessee Supreme Court · 1995

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by452 opinions

  1. State v. BurnsTennessee Supreme Court · 1999
  2. Jaco v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 2003
  3. State v. BerryTennessee Supreme Court · 2004
  4. State v. CarterTennessee Supreme Court · 1999
  5. State v. HammondsTennessee Supreme Court · 2000

447 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API