Skip to main content

State of Tennessee v. Whitney Kristina Harris

TENNCRIMAPPJuly 17, 2017No. E2016-00604-CCA-R3-CD

Case Details

Judge(s)
Judge Robert H. Montgomery, Jr.
Status
Published
Procedural Posture
appeal

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Excerpt

The Defendant, Whitney Kristina Harris, was convicted upon her guilty pleas of tampering with evidence, a Class C felony, and accessory after the fact to first degree murder, a Class E felony. See T.C.A. §§ 39-16-503 (2014) (tampering with evidence), 39-11-411 (2014) (accessory after the fact). The Defendant pleaded guilty as a Range II offender as a term of the plea agreement and agreed to an effective ten-year sentence. The manner of service of her sentence was reserved for the trial court's determination. On appeal, the Defendant contends that the trial court erred in imposing incarceration rather than an alternative sentence. We affirm the judgments of the trial court, and we remand the case for correction of a clerical error on the accessory after the fact judgment.

What This Ruling Means

**What happened:** This case involved Whitney Kristina Harris, who was convicted of serious criminal charges including tampering with evidence and being an accessory to first-degree murder. She pleaded guilty to these felony charges and agreed to a 10-year prison sentence as part of a plea deal. The case went to an appeals court for review. **What the court decided:** The appeals court sent the case back to the lower trial court for further proceedings (called a "remand"). The court did not overturn her conviction, but required additional review or action by the original trial court. No monetary damages were awarded in this criminal case. **Why this matters for workers:** This appears to be primarily a criminal law case rather than a traditional employment law dispute. However, it serves as an important reminder that employees can face serious criminal charges if they become involved in illegal activities, even if those activities are connected to their workplace. Workers should understand that criminal convictions can have severe consequences for their employment prospects and professional licenses. The case highlights the importance of staying within legal boundaries and seeking proper legal counsel if facing criminal charges that could affect their career.

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

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. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.