State of Tennessee v. John Brichetto
Annotate this CaseCourt Description:
Authoring Judge: Judge D. Kelly Thomas, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Paul G. Summers
The pro se appellant appeals as of right from the Morgan County Criminal Court's order denying post-judgment motions filed pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure "36 et seq." The trial court summarily denied the pleadings based upon the pro se appellant's earlier execution of a waiver of all direct, post-conviction, and collateral challenges to the conviction, in exchange for his codefendant-wife's receiving a more lenient sentence. Because this court has twice ruled that the waiver was knowingly and voluntarily entered, we sua sponte affirm the judgment of the trial court pursuant to Rule 20 of the Tennessee Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals.
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE 10/09/2017 STATE OF TENNESSEE v. JOHN BRICHETTO Appeal from the Criminal Court for Morgan County No.2011-CR-41A Paul G.Summers,Senior Judge No. E2017-01033-CCA-R3-CD The pro se appellant appeals as of right from the Morgan County Criminal Court's order denying post-judgment motions filed pursuant to Tennessee Rule of Criminal Procedure "36 et seq." The trial court summarily denied the pleadings based upon the pro se appellant's earlier execution of a waiver of all direct, post-conviction, and collateral challenges to the conviction, in exchange for his codefendant-wife's receiving a more lenient sentence. Because this court has twice ruled that the waiver was knowingly and voluntarily entered, we sua sponte affirm the judgment of the trial court pursuant to Rule 20 ofthe Tennessee Rules ofthe Court of Criminal Appeals. Tenn. R. App.P.3 Appeal as of Right; Judgment of the Criminal Court Affirmed Pursuant to Rule 20, Rules of the Court of Criminal Appeals D.KELLY THOMAS, JR. J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which JAMES CURWOOD WITT', JR., and NORMA MCGEE OGLE, JJ.,joined. John Brichetto, Pikeville, Tennessee, pro se. Herbert H. Slatery III, Attorney General and Reporter; Nicholas White Spangler, Assistant Attorney General; L. Russell Johnson, District Attorney General; and Robert C. Edwards, Assistant District Attorney General, for the appellee, State ofTennessee. MEMORANDUM OPINION In this matter, the defendant, John Brichetto, appeals as of right from the trial court's summary denial of his "Motion for Amendment of Judgement [sic] Order Pursuant to TN. [sic] R. Crim. P 36 et seq." challenging his conviction of theft of property valued at $60,000 or more. In State v. John H. Brichetto, Jr., No. E2016-01001CCA-R3-CD, 2017 WL 3896213 (Tenn. Crim. App., at Knoxville, Sept. 6, 2017) (Brichetto I), the pro se appellant unsuccessfully appealed from the trial court's summary denial of his motion for reduction of sentence challenging the sentence imposed in the same case. Tenn. R. Crim. P. 35. In John H. Brichetto, Jr. v. State, No. E2016-01855CCA-R3-PC, 2017 WL 3037539 (Tenn. Crim. App., at Knoxville, July 18, 2017), perm. app. filed (Tenn. Aug. 8, 2017) (Brichetto II), the pro se appellant unsuccessfully appealed from the trial court's summary denial of his petition for post-conviction relief challenging the conviction in the same case. In each of these cases, the trial court's summary denials were based upon the pro for se appellant's execution of a written waiver of his right to appeal, his right to file post-conviction relief, and his right to collaterally attack his conviction, which was made in exchange for his codefendant-wife's receiving a reduced sentence following their convictions at a joined trial. In the two previous appeals, this court has affirmed the trial court's summary denials of relief based, at least in part, upon the finding that the pro se appellant knowingly and voluntarily waived his rights to further challenge his conviction or sentence. See Brichetto I, slip op. at 14; Brichetto II, slip op. at 9-10. The validity of the waiver is once again challenged in this appeal. We conclude that the pro se the appellant's attempt to relitigate this matter once more is barred by the doctrine of "law of the case." Memphis Publ'g Co. v. Tenn. Petroleum, 975 S.W.2d 303, 306(Tenn. 1998). Likewise, we further conclude that "an opinion in this case would have no precedential value" and, sua sponte, affirm the judgment of the trial court pursuant to Rule 20 of the Rules of the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals. D. 2 LLY MAS,JR., JUDG
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
