The Tennessee Supreme Court ruled in State v. Shanessa L. Sokolosky that an appeal of a probation revocation is not moot even if the defendant completed the sentence. Sokolosky, who pleaded guilty in 2019 and received probation instead of jail time, was later alleged to have violated probation and ordered to serve the rest of her sentence in custody. She challenged the arrest warrant, arguing unethical practices by the probation company. By the time the appeal reached the Court of Criminal Appeals, Sokolosky's sentence had ended, and she had been released from all custody or supervision. The court dismissed the appeal as moot. According to a release, the Tennessee Supreme Court disagreed with the dismissal, saying the appeal was not moot because Sokolosky could still face consequences due to the probation violation. The court also clarified that its ruling was not an exception to the doctrine of mootness but one rendering the case not moot. It reversed the decision and sent the case back to the appeals court to be heard on the merits.

Nashville is appealing a Tennessee Court of Appeals decision that upheld a 2023 state law cutting its city council in half to the Tennessee Supreme Court, WPLN reports. The ruling from a three-judge panel of the appeals court overturned a lower court ruling that the law was unconstitutional under the state's Home Rule amendment, which prohibits legislation that specifically targets one local government. If the law ultimately is upheld, the council would be reduced from 40 to 20 members for the 2027 election.

The Tennessee Supreme Court issued an order yesterday denying a death row inmate's request for a hearing on his competency, paving the way for his execution on Aug. 5, The Tennessean reports. Byron Black's lawyers have argued that his intellectual disability, along with dementia and severe brain damage, make him incompetent for execution. In June, they asked the justices to reverse a lower court’s ruling that declined to consider the issue. In denying the request, the Supreme Court stated that the intellectual disability claim has been litigated fully on the merits and no extenuating circumstances warrant a different outcome. Black's lawyer said she plans to appeal the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court. The legal team also has filed a petition in Davidson County Chancery Court, asking the state to ensure that his implanted heart defibrillator is disabled before his execution. A hearing in that matter is scheduled for July 14.

The Tennessee Supreme Court has issued notice that the Tennessee General Assembly has ratified amendments to the Tennessee Rules of Civil Procedure and Tennessee Rules of Appellate Procedure. The amendments, adopted by the court in December 2024, took effect on July 1.

The Tennessee Supreme Court has issued an order amending Supreme Court Rule 11, section VI a(1) and a(2) to remove Memphis Area Legal Services (MALS) from the list of organizations eligible to receive funding from the state’s Civil Legal Representation of Indigents Fund. It also adjusted the percentage of funding the remaining three organizations will receive from the fund. The court says it took the action since MALS is no longer an organization within the Legal Services Corporation. Read the order or see a red line version of the changes.

Attorneys for Byron Black, a man on Tennessee’s death row, are asking the Tennessee Supreme Court to order a lower court to consider whether he is mentally competent to be executed. Black was sentenced to death in Nashville in 1989 for the murders of his girlfriend and her daughters. He is scheduled to be executed on Aug. 5. In court filings, Black’s attorneys have said he has an intellectual disability, progressive dementia and brain damage, which leave him incapable of grasping why he is being put to death. They argue that the trial court and Court of Criminal Appeals erred when they declined to consider competency. Nashville Public Radio has more on the story. In 2022, Nashville District Attorney Glenn Funk agreed that Black should be removed from death row.

The Tennessee Supreme Court will hear an appeal of the Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) as it tries to protect its constitutional rights in a case connected to an inquiry by the SBC Credentials Committee. According to a press release from Baptist Press, Preston Garner, a longtime worship pastor and school music teacher, and his wife Kellie filed suit in 2023 against the SBC, Guidepost Solutions and others alleging defamation/libel and slander, defamation by implication, invasion of privacy and loss of consortium. The Garners claim the SBC defamed them in conversations after a confidential report was made to the SBC’s abuse hotline. The SBC argued in court that it was protected by the church autonomy doctrine, a First Amendment right which keeps courts from interfering in disputes within religious bodies that involve religious faith, doctrine or governance. Two lower courts have rejected that argument.

The Tennessee Supreme Court issued a decision in State of Tennessee v. Pervis Tyrone Payne affirming the trial court’s modification of Payne’s death sentences but vacating its order that the sentences be served concurrently instead of consecutively. Payne was convicted of two counts of first-degree murder in 1987 for the murders of Charisse Christopher and her 2-year-old daughter, and the attempted murder of Christopher’s 3-year-old son. The court ruled that while a 2021 law allowed the trial court to reduce Payne’s death sentences due to intellectual disability, it did not authorize the court to change the sentencing alignment. As a result, Payne’s life sentences must be served consecutively, delaying his eligibility for parole. Shelby County Criminal Court Judge Paula Skahan had ruled in February 2022 that Payne would serve his two life sentences concurrently, which would have made him eligible for parole in five years. His death penalty sentence was officially vacated in November 2021.

The Tennessee Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) has provided a notice of intent to release a request for proposal (RFP) for a statewide court case management system and efiling solution for all of the state’s trial courts. According to the AOC, this initiative is a critical element of its strategic vision to modernize court technology and enhance data accessibility across the state's judicial system. The notice, which can be found here, provides early awareness of the RFP to "support broad and fair competition for this procurement and to allow vendors, including those who may desire to partner, adequate time to respond." Interested vendors are encouraged to monitor this link for the full RFP document and submission details, which is expected to be released in July.

The Tennessee Supreme Court recently adopted amendments to Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 46. The change, which took effect immediately, allows attorneys to electronically file unsworn declarations with electronic signatures in lieu of printed notarized affidavits. The court said it took the action after the General Assembly approved a change to Rule 22 of the Rules of Appellate Procedure, which allows the use of unsworn declarations under penalty of perjury in lieu of notarized affidavits if filed by licensed Tennessee attorneys in good standing. The change to the appellate rules was proposed jointly by the Tennessee District Public Defenders Conference, the Tennessee Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers and the Tennessee Attorney General’s Office. Read the order and see a redline version of the changes.