State of Tennessee v. William Glenn Rogers - Concurring and Dissenting (Concurring/Dissenting)
Annotate this CaseCourt Description:
Authoring Judge: Justice Adolpho A. Birch, Jr.
Trial Court Judge: Judge Robert W. Wedemeyer
Download PDF
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE October 5, 2005 Session STATE OF TENNESSEE v. WILLIAM GLENN ROGERS Automatic Appeal from the Court of Criminal Appeals Circuit Court for Montgomery County No. 38939 Robert W. Wedemeyer, Judge No. M2002-01798-SC-DDT-DD - Filed February 17, 2006 ADOLPHO A. BIRCH, JR., J., concurring in part and dissenting in part. I concur in the conclusion of the majority that Rogers’ convictions should be affirmed. As to the sentence of death, however, I respectfully dissent. I continue to adhere to my view that the comparative proportionality review protocol currently embraced by the majority is inadequate to shield defendants from the arbitrary and disproportionate imposition of the death penalty. See State v. Reid, 164 S.W.3d 286, 323-325 (Tenn. 2005)(Birch, J., concurring and dissenting), and cases cited therein. Accordingly, I respectfully dissent from that portion of the majority opinion affirming the imposition of the death penalty in this case. ___________________________________ ADOLPHO A. BIRCH, JR.
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.
