Jackson v. Campbell ( 1999 )

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS AT NASHVILLE
JAMES L. JACKSON ) C/A No. 01A01-9902-CH-00098
) Davidson Chancery
Petitioner ) No. 98-2052-I
)
v.
TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT
)
)
)
FILED
OF CORRECTIONS, DONAL ) October 15, 1999
CAMPBELL, COMMISSIONER )
) Cecil Crowson, Jr.
Respondent )
Appellate Court Clerk
APPEALED FROM THE CHANCERY COURT OF DAVIDSON COUNTY
THE HONORABLE IRVIN H. KILCREASE, JR., CHANCELLOR
James L. Jackson, Pro Se
S.T.S.R.C.F.
Route 4, Box 600
Pikeville, TN 37367
Petitioner
Paul G. Summers
Attorney General and Reporter
AND
Arthur Crownover, II
Assistant Attorney General
425 Fifth Avenue North
Nashville, TN 37243-0488
Attorneys for Respondent
AFFIRMED AND REMANDED
Houston M. Goddard, Presiding Judge
CONCUR:
FRANKS
SUSANO
O P I N I O N
Goddard, P.J.
This is a petition seeking a writ of certiorari filed
by James L. Jackson, an inmate of the Penal System of this State,
Pro Se. The caption lists as Respondents “Tennessee Dept. of
Corrections, Donal Campbell (Commissioner), Respondent.” The
case proceeded, however, as if only the Department of Corrections
was a party Defendant and our opinion will be based on this
assumption.
Mr. Jackson contends that he has not been given proper
credit in reduction of his sentence and that he is entitled to be
forthwith released.
The Chancellor filed a memorandum opinion denying Mr.
Jackson’s petition, resulting in this appeal wherein he raises
the following issues:
1- WHETHER DENIAL OF DISCOVERY VIOLATED JACKSON RIGHT
TO FURTHER DEFEND HIS ACTION.
2- WHETHER JACKSON STATED A CLAIM UPON WHICH RELIEF
COULD HAVE BEEN GRANTED.
3- COURT DID IMPROPER ANALYZED JACKSON WRIT OF
CERTIORARI.
4- WHETHER JACKSON HAVE EXPIRED HIS SENTENCE, AND
SHOULD BE FORWITH RELEASED, AS A MATTER OF LAW.
Our review of the record persuades us that this is an
appropriate case for affirmance under Rule 10(a) of this Court.
Before concluding, we should point out that the
Petitioner is not without an avenue of redress, but, as stated in
the brief of the Department of Corrections, may pursue his
2
contentions before the Criminal Court for Shelby County which,
under the authority of State v. Burkhart, 566 S.W.2d 871 (Tenn.
1978), “does have the power to correct the judgment” if
warranted.
For the foregoing reasons the judgment of the Trial
Court is affirmed and the cause remanded for collection of costs
below. Costs of appeal are adjudged against Mr. Jackson.
___________________________
Houston M. Goddard, P.J.
CONCUR:
______________________________
Herschel P. Franks, J.
______________________________
Charles D. Susano, Jr., J.
3