Case law · Highest court · Tennessee

State v. Bland

Decided
December 1, 1997
Docket
02S01-9603-CR-00032
Status
Published
Jurisdiction
Tennessee

Cited 3,458 timesNo negative treatment found in this library

What later courts said

  • stating that even “where there is no discernible basis for the difference in sentencing, the death sentence is not necessarily disproportionate” — State v. Carruthers (2000)
  • holding that “[q]uestions involving the credibility of witnesses, the weight and value of the evidence, and all factual disputes raised by the evidence are entrusted to the trier of fact.” — State of Tennessee v. Dallas Sarden (2020)
  • holding that a guilty verdict by the trier of fact accredits the testimony of the State’s witnesses and resolves all conflicts in the evidence in favor of the prosecution’s theory — State of Tennessee v. Walter Martin (2007)

Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.

How the opinion begins

OPINION DROWOTA, Justice.

In this capital ease, the defendant, Andre S. Bland, was convicted of premeditated first degree murder, attempted aggravated robbery, especially aggravated robbery, and attempted first degree murder.[1] In the sentencing hearing, the juiy found one aggravating circumstance: “[t]he murder was especially heinous, atrocious or cruel in that it involved torture or serious physical abuse beyond that necessary to produce death.” [*656] Tenn.Code Ann. § 39-13-204(i)(5) (1991 Repl. & 1996 Supp.). Finding that the aggravating circumstance outweighed mitigating circumstances' beyond a reasonable doubt, the jury sentenced the defendant to death by electrocution.

On direct appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeals, the defendant challenged both his conviction and sentence. After fully considering the defendant’s claims, the Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the trial court’s judgment. Thereafter, pursuant to Tenn. Code Ann. § 39-13-206(a)(l) (1996 Supp.),[2] the case was docketed in this Court.

Cite this

State v. Bland, 958 S.W.2d 651 (1997)

Read the full opinion

Free account needed

Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.