Springfield attorney Larry Wayne Simmons died Friday following a 46-year legal career. Simmons served as a corporal in the U.S. Marine Corps before earning his law degree at the Nashville School of Law. He began his career as an attorney in 1970 and later served as the Adams city attorney and as a city judge in Springfield. Funeral services will be held on Feb. 18. Visitation will take place from 11 a.m. to 2 p.m. CST in the chapel of Austin & Bell Funeral Home, 509 N. Walnut St., Springfield, TN 37172. The service will take place at 2 p.m. Burial will follow at Hillcrest Cemetery, 3141 US-31W., White House, TN 37188. Memorial donations may be made to St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, 501 St. Jude Place, Memphis, TN 38105, or to Churches of Christ Disaster Relief Effort, P.O. Box 111180, Nashville, TN 37222-1180.

The city of Johnson City agreed last week to pay $28 million to settle a lawsuit filed by multiple anonymous women who accused the city police department of failing to investigate a man who allegedly drugged and sexually assaulted dozens of women between 2018 and 2021. The department has denied allegations of corruption or bribery in the handling of the cases, according to WPLN News. The accused assailant, Sean Williams, is currently in jail on charges of producing child sexual abuse images and escaping police custody, though he has not yet been charged in connection with the women's allegations. The lawsuit is one of three accusing the police department of mishandling evidence that Williams was drugging and assaulting women for years. The city said it has since improved department practices, including adopting a new sexual assault investigation protocol and creating a "comfortable space" for victim interviews.

Those interested in an appointed position on the TBA Young Lawyers Division's 2025-2026 Board should review available positions and complete the online application by Feb. 28. Get details on positions and a link to the application on the YLD's webpage.

Those interested in an appointed position on the TBA Young Lawyers Division's 2025-2026 board should review available positions and complete the online application by Feb. 28. Get details on positions and a link to the application on the YLD's webpage.

THAPAR, Circuit Judge. When police officers saw George Short driving twenty-five miles per hour over the speed limit and without a car hood, they tried to initiate a traffic stop. But Short refused to obey their orders and led the officers on a high-speed chase. When the officers caught and arrested Short, they found a rifle in his car. Short wasn’t allowed to have the rifle since he had several prior felonies, so he pled guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm. Given Short’s prior violent felonies, he was sentenced as an armed career criminal. But Short argues that the factual basis in support of his plea agreement was insufficient. It wasn’t, so we affirm.

MURPHY, Circuit Judge. This case requires us to consider whether the district court lawfully used a standard form order with only a few sentences of analysis to deny Armani Davis- Malone’s request for a sentence reduction. The court originally imposed a 60-month sentence that fell ten months below Davis-Malone’s guidelines range. The Sentencing Commission then amended the guidelines in a way that would have reduced his range to 57 to 71 months if the change had applied at his sentencing. Because the Commission made this change retroactive, Davis-Malone sought a reduced sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). But the district court denied relief because its 60-month sentence remained near the bottom of his amended range. Davis-Malone now argues that the district court legally erred because he interprets its form order as finding him ineligible for a sentence reduction. And even if it did not commit this error, Davis-Malone adds, the court abused its discretion by failing to explain its denial in more detail. Yet we read the court’s order to have found Davis-Malone eligible and to have denied him relief as a matter of its discretion. And we conclude the court did not abuse its discretion by relying on a form order given this case’s simple facts and the record showing that the court considered the parties’ evidence and arguments. We thus affirm.

Defendant, Darrell Scott Wallis, was indicted by a Maury County Grand Jury on three counts of automobile burglary. Pursuant to a plea agreement, he pled guilty to one count of automobile burglary to receive a Range II sentence at thirty-five percent with the trial court to determine the length of sentence and manner of service. The trial court sentenced Defendant to serve three years and six months, suspended to probation after service of twelve months of incarceration. Defendant appeals, arguing that the trial court abused its discretion by ordering the split confinement sentence. Following our review of the record, the briefs of the parties, and the applicable law, we affirm the judgment of the trial court.

The defendant, William Read, appeals the order of the trial court revoking his probation and ordering him to serve the remainder of his eleven-year and six-month sentence in confinement. Upon our review of the record and the parties’ briefs, we dismiss the appeal as untimely.

A Madison County jury convicted the defendant, Terrion Avantae Jones, of one count of possession of marijuana with intent to sell, one count of possession of marijuana with intent to deliver, two counts of possession of a firearm during the commission of a dangerous felony, and possession of drug paraphernalia, for which he received an effective sentence of four years to be served as three years in confinement at 100% with the remainder to be served on supervised probation. On appeal, the defendant argues the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress. He also contends the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to support his convictions. After reviewing the record and considering the applicable law, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

Defendant, Kevin Harris, appeals his Cheatham County convictions for aggravated sexual battery and rape of a child. He contends on appeal that: (1) the trial court erred in admitting the victim’s forensic interview; (2) the evidence was insufficient to establish penetration; and (3) the prosecutor committed multiple instances of improper argument during closing by (a) commenting on Defendant’s failure to testify and (b) vouching for the victim’s credibility. After review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.