Legal Opinion · Dissent

State v. Curry

Tennessee Supreme Court

Decided March 8, 1999No. 02S01-9709-CC-00079Published

1DissentHolder, Justice

I disagree with the majority’s holding in this case that the district attorney general abused his discretion in denying pretrial diversion. The defendant has committed an extremely serious offense in this case. She has admitted to embezzling approximately $27,400.00 from her employer. Her crime was not an isolated incident but a complicated, calculated, and deliberate criminal scheme that occurred repeatedly over a course of two years until she was ultimately caught.

Pretrial diversion is a legislative largess as well as extraordinary relief. Pretrial diversion relieves criminal defendants of…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. State v. HammersleyTennessee Supreme Court · 1983
  2. State v. PinkhamTennessee Supreme Court · 1997
  3. State v. HerronTennessee Supreme Court · 1989
  4. State v. CarrCourt of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · 1993
  5. State v. WatkinsCourt of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee · 1980

7 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