Preview:

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE
July 19, 2005 Session STATE OF TENNESSEE v. BRANDON RAYMOND BARTEE
Direct Appeal from the Criminal Court for Sumner County No. CR49-2004 Jane Wheatcraft , Judge

No. M2004-02637-CCA-R3-CD - Filed September 20, 2005

On appeal, the defendant challenges the length and consecutive nature of his sentences on three counts of sexual battery. Upon review, we conclude that: (1) the enhanced sentences were justified based upon the defendant's prior criminal behavior; (2) the mitigating factors, even if applied, would not have lessened the enhanced sentence; and (3) the defendant's consecutive sentence was proper based upon the predatory nature of his conduct and the residual psychological effects incurred by the minor victim. Therefore, we affirm the sentences imposed by the trial court. Tenn. R. App. P. 3 Appeal as of Right; Judgments of the Criminal Court Affirmed JOHN EVERETT WILLIAMS, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which ALAN E. GLENN and ROBERT W. WEDEMEYER , JJ., joined. David Allen Doyle, District Public Defender, for the appellant, Brandon Raymond Bartee. Paul G. Summers, Attorney General and Reporter; Elizabeth B. Marney, Senior Counsel; Lawrence Ray Whitley, District Attorney General; and Sallie Wade Brown, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State of Tennessee. OPINION The defendant, Brandon Raymond Bartee, was indicted on three counts of aggravated sexual battery (a Class B felony), but pled guilty to three counts of the lesser included offense of sexual battery (a Class E felony). The defendant was sentenced as a Range I, standard offender to consecutive sentences of two years on each count, for a total effective sentence of six years. The facts underlying the charges were summarized by the State at the time of the defendant's plea: Back in November of last year [the] Portland Police Department got a call on a suspicious person complaint by Watt Hardison [S]chool. The defendant, they learned, was a convicted, registered sex offender from the State of Texas. He made contact across the street from the school; identified himself to the family as a magazine salesman. He began to wrestle with the people's children, during which

he touched a six-year-old's breasts, buttocks, and genitalia. He left the residence before the police were contacted, and there were some more facts that will come out at the [sentencing] hearing. He also made contact with the complainants' neighbors and began asking about their children after representing he was a representative of a game show. After an open plea of guilty and a sentencing hearing, the trial court found the following: In preparation for this hearing, the Court studied the presentence report. The Court also studied the psychosexual evaluation that was done. This was a bifurcated hearing, and I heard from Detective Don Hardin, as well as Donna Moore from the mental health center who actually did the psychosexual evaluation. I heard from them at a prior hearing. And the Court is familiar with all of the principles of sentencing that are set out in 40-35-101 and 102, as well as 40-35-115. ... This Court finds that this defendant is the worst kind of predator. He studied these children. He went to the house. He got into the house through deceit, first by saying he was an FBI agent and then by saying he was selling magazines. He told Ms. Lemons that he had hidden cameras on the house from across the street. He was very interested in the children. He is obviously a predator. He obviously represents a threat to society. He has been adjudicated a sex offender by the State of Texas for the aggravated sexual assault of a niece. He was in custody and went through a sex offender treatment program in the State of Texas. He was in custody for a long period of time. That obviously did not deter his conduct. This is, as I have said, the worst kind of behavior when children in our community are at risk. So I think that

Download barteebrOPN.pdf

Tennessee Law