State v. Burns

I must respectfully dissent from the opinion of my learned colleagues in their reversal of Benjamin Anthony Burns’ convictions for burglary in the second degree and grand larceny on the grounds of newly discovered evidence. My disagreement stems from what, in my opinion, is the majority’s misinterpretation of the applicable standard of appellate review under State v. Goswick, 656 S.W.2d 355 (Tenn.1983). The majority suggests that appellant is entitled to a new trial as a matter of right simply because the three-prong test of Goswick is met. I cannot agree.

A careful reading of Goswick reveals…