Preview:

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE
STATE OF TENNESSEE v. LESERGIO DURAN WILSON
Appeal from the Criminal Court for Davidson County No. 2010-B-1227 Cheryl A. Blackburn, Judge

No. M2013-00306-CCA-10B-CD - Filed February 13, 2013

OPINION The Appellant, Lesergio Duran Wilson, petitions this Court for an accelerated interlocutory appeal as of right pursuant to Tennessee Supreme Court Rule 10B, Section 2. The Appellant seeks review of the trial court's order denying his motion to recuse. After a thorough review of the petition, this Court concludes that the trial court properly denied Appellant's motion for recusal. The order of the trial court is affirmed. Tenn. Sup. Ct. R. 10B; Appeal as of Right; Order of the Trial Court is Affirmed. J ERRY L. S MITH, J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which T HOMAS T. W OODALL and R OBERT W. W EDEMEYER, JJ., joined. C. Dawn Deanor, Pubic Defender; Jonathan F. Wing, Assistant Public Defender; Kristin Stangl, Assistant Public Defender; Paul Bruno, for the Appellant, Lesergio Duran Wilson. Robert E. Cooper, Jr., Attorney General and Reporter, for the Appellee, State of Tennessee. Background The Appellant, Lesergio Duran Wilson, has been indicted for premeditated first degree murder in this case (2010-B-1227). He was also indicted for felony first degree murder and especially aggravated robbery in a separate case (2010-C-1912). The State elected to try the Appellant in case 2010-C-1912 first, and the Appellant was convicted by a jury of the charged offenses. The trial court sentenced the Appellant to life plus twentyfive years. The State, relying on those convictions in support of one of two alleged aggravating circumstances, has filed notice of its intent to seek the death penalty in case 2010-B-1227. The Appellant's trial in this case is scheduled to begin September 2013.

Motion to Recuse Pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 10B, the Appellant filed a motion requesting the trial court to recuse itself from further participation in case 2010-B-1227. The Appellant alleged the following grounds for recusal: (1) The trial court previously presided over the Appellant's trial in case 2010C-1912, which ended with convictions for first degree murder and especially aggravated robbery, as well as the subsequent sentencing hearing in that case, which resulted in a sentence of life plus an additional twenty-five years; (2) During the sentencing hearing and pretrial bond hearing in case 2010-C1912, the trial court made rulings and statements which indicated it has prejudged the Appellant's guilt in this case; and (3) Specific events occurred during the sentencing hearing in case 2010-C1912 which create in a person of ordinary prudence a reasonable basis to question the trial court's impartiality in the instant case. As to the first alleged ground, the Appellant asserted that the trial court "heard proof and arguments designed to convince both the jury and the Court that the crime he committed was `the worst of the worst' and that he was a cold-blooded killer. It would be impossible for any Court to listen to such proof without forming an opinion that would bias it against [the Appellant] in a subsequent case." The trial court ordered consecutive sentencing in case 2010-C-1912 based upon its finding that the Appellant is "a dangerous offender whose behavior indicates little or no regard for human life and no hesitation about committing a crime in which the risk to human life is high." See Tenn. Code Ann.

Download wilsonlopn.pdf

Tennessee Law