Suppress Confession, Motion to

Unless otherwise indicated, all indented material is copied directly from the court’s opinion.

Decisions of the Tennessee Supreme Court

Decisions of the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals

State of Tennessee v. Malone,  (Tenn. Ct. Crim. App. Feb. 24, 2022).

On  appellate  review  of  suppression  issues,  the  prevailing  party  “is  entitled  to  the strongest legitimate view of the evidence adduced at the suppression hearing as well as all reasonable  and  legitimate  inferences  that  may  be  drawn  from  the  evidence.”    State  v. Talley,  307  S.W.3d  723,  729  (Tenn.  2010)  (quoting  State  v.  Odom,  928  S.W.2d  18,  23 (Tenn.  1996)).   Questions  about  “the  assessment  of  witness  credibility,  the  weight  and value  of  evidence,  and  the  resolution  of  evidentiary  conflicts  are  entrusted  to  the  trial  court” as  the  trier  of  fact.    State  v.  Meeks,  262  S.W.3d  710,  722  (Tenn.  2008)  (citing  State  v. Scarborough, 201 S.W.3d  607,  615  (Tenn.  2006)).   When  the  trial  court  “makes  findings of  fact  in  the  course  of  ruling  upon  a  motion  to  suppress,  those  findings  are  binding  on appeal  unless  the  evidence  in  the  record  preponderates  against  them.”    Id. (citing  State  v. Berrios, 235 S.W.3d 99, 104 (Tenn. 2007)). Conversely, a trial court’s conclusions of law along  with  its  application  of  the  law  to  the  facts are  reviewed  de  novo  without  any presumption of correctness.    Id. (citing  State v.  Hayes, 188 S.W.3d 505, 510 (Tenn. 2006)).