Skip to main content

State of Tennessee v. Montrell Reid

TENNCRIMAPPMarch 20, 2026No. W2025-00780-CCA-R3-CD
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Judge(s)
Judge Matthew J. Wilson
Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Claim Types

Harassment

Excerpt

Defendant, Montrell Reid, appeals from his guilty-pleaded convictions for harassment and stalking, both Class A misdemeanors. Under the plea agreement, Defendant agreed to serve eleven months and twenty-nine days for each count, with the sentences to be served consecutively and the manner of service to be determined by the trial court. At sentencing, the trial court denied Defendant's request for probation and ordered that he serve his sentence in confinement. On appeal, Defendant contends that the trial court erred in denying his request for probation. Following our review, we affirm the trial court's judgments as to the denial of probation, but we remand for a determination of the percentage of service pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated section 40-35-302(d).

What This Ruling Means

**What Happened:** This case involved Montrell Reid, who was convicted of harassment and stalking in the workplace. Reid pleaded guilty to both charges, which are Class A misdemeanors under Tennessee law. Under his plea agreement, he was sentenced to serve nearly one year for each charge, with the sentences to run back-to-back rather than at the same time. Reid asked the trial court to let him serve his sentence on probation instead of in jail, but the judge denied this request and ordered him to serve his time in confinement. **What the Court Decided:** Reid appealed his sentence, and the appeals court sent the case back to the lower court for further review. The specific details of what issues the appeals court found are not fully provided in this excerpt, but the case was remanded rather than the conviction being overturned. **Why This Matters for Workers:** This case demonstrates that workplace harassment and stalking are serious criminal offenses that can result in jail time, not just employment consequences. Workers should understand that severe harassment behavior can lead to criminal charges beyond just losing their job, and that courts take these offenses seriously enough to impose significant jail sentences.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse more:Harassment cases

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.