TN Supreme Court decision on serious bodily injury

[Pain103]

I read this decision and I am completely speachless on how being shot alone isn't considered serious bodily injury. I doubt seriously this will in anyway influence the decision on using a firearm in defense of serious bodily injury or death. This just blows my mind and wanted to share it, I'll give a brief overview and link the opinion.

Robber 1 and Robber 2 enter an apartment where a drug deal is occurring and rob two people. One robber fires his pistol striking one of the people in the leg. The court states although the bullet passed through the victim's leg, the wound required minimal medical treatment and did not cause the victim to suffer loss os consciousness, extreme pain, disfigurement, or impairment. They dropped the conviction from a Class A Felony Especially Aggravated Robbery to a Class B Felony of Aggravated Robbery.

http://www.tncourts.gov/sites/default/files/farmermichael_opn.pdf

[Guest Razz]

My understanding of the law it this instance is very poor. Having said that, it seems "extreme pain" would be hard to prove for or against.

Also...doesn't firing a firearm at someone while committing a crime at least constitute attempted murder?

Again, I am about as ignorant as can be on this subject so a little info from anybody is appreciated.

Razz

[Stegall Law Firm]

I was Farmer's lawyer at trial and on the first appeal, then another lawyer came in for the Supreme Court appeal (I do some appeals but I don't claim to be an expert in them). Interesting case. Don't feel bad for the victims, though. They were just drug dealers who lied every which way at trial.

[DaveTN]

That’s unbelievable.

Because the guy said in open court the pain was “not that badâ€; they may get a reduced sentence.

Costs of this appeal are taxed to the State of Tennessee.

Their attorneys hit a home run and we get to pay the bill.

[DaveTN]

I was Farmer's lawyer at trial and on the first appeal, then another lawyer came in for the Supreme Court appeal (I do some appeals but I don't claim to be an expert in them). Interesting case. Don't feel bad for the victims, though. They were just drug dealers who lied every which way at trial.

I don’t feel bad for the victims, I feel bad for us. Especially those that face these guys the next time they decide to shoot someone in a robbery that may not be dirt bags. I don’t see how the Judges that did this can live with it. Well I do; it’s just a game to them.

[Guest dfsixstring]

Thanks Pain103 for posting this. This just infuriates me. We can thank the courts for proving to these thugs that being a "bad shot" is all it takes to reduce attempted murder charges when you're dealing drugs. As I'm reading the sentence I just wrote - i still can't believe it.

Dfsixstring

SR9c

LCP

RST4S

[QuietDan]

Sarcasm on:

Not suprised.

This was Shelby County. Happens all the time.

Weapon was a .32. A bee-sting.

Sarcasm off.

[Sam1]

Weapon was a .32. A bee-sting.

That makes sense because only ak-47's are dangerous

[TN Outlaw]

That makes sense because only ak-47's are dangerous

or other guns with AK style (Clips)

[Stegall Law Firm]

You may not like the result but try to respect or at least understand the reasoning. In any criminal case the state must prove each element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. Here it did not prove serious bodily injury. And don't blame the judges. It is most certainly not a game to them. There is no one to blame. As many freedoms as our system guarantees, it's not going to be as nice, neat and tidy as people want it to be.

[Chucktshoes]

Sarcasm on:

Not suprised.

This was Shelby County. Happens all the time.

Weapon was a .32. A bee-sting.

Sarcasm off.

Don't they know that .32's are only for inbred Austrian Archdukes? Sheesh, idiot criminals.

[Guest PapaB]

You may not like the result but try to respect or at least understand the reasoning. In any criminal case the state must prove each element of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt. Here it did not prove serious bodily injury. And don't blame the judges. It is most certainly not a game to them. There is no one to blame. As many freedoms as our system guarantees, it's not going to be as nice, neat and tidy as people want it to be.

The problem is, we can't understand the reasoning. To us, being shot automatically constitutes "serious bodily injury" so how could the State not have proved that element? We must blame the judges, in this instance, for acting like academics rather than people that live in the real world. It's time they allow common sense to color their thinking.