Interpretation of Supreme Court Rules
Except as indicated, all indented material is copied directly from the court’s opinion.
Opinions of the Tennessee Supreme Court
Dotson v. State, No. W2019-01059-SC-R11-PD, p. 3 (Tenn. July 7, 2023).
These issues present questions of law, which we review de novo with no presumption of correctness. State v. McCoy, 459 S.W.3d 1, 8 (Tenn. 2014) (citing Waters v. Farr, 291 S.W.3d 873, 882 (Tenn. 2009)); Pratcher v. Methodist Healthcare Memphis Hosps., 407 S.W.3d 727, 734 (Tenn. 2013). We interpret Supreme Court Rules using the same rules of construction as when we interpret statutes. Thomas v. Oldfield, 279 S.W.3d 259, 261 (Tenn. 2009) (“In construing the rules of this Court, . . . our goal is to ascertain and give effect to this Court’s intent in adopting its rules.”). As the promulgator of Rule 13, this Court “is the rule’s primary arbiter.” In re Gant, 937 S.W.2d 842, 846 (Tenn. 1996).
Opinions of the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals
