Skip to main content

State of Tennessee v. German Calles

TENNCRIMAPPOctober 25, 2018No. M2017-01552-CCA-R3-CD
Defendant WinGerman Calles

Case Details

Judge(s)
Judge J. Ross Dyer
Status
Published
Procedural Posture
Criminal appeal from conviction and sentencing; appellate affirmance

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Outcome

Defendant's appeal of conviction and sentencing was denied. The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, upholding the 26-year effective sentence for multiple felonies including attempted voluntary manslaughter, aggravated assault, robbery, and burglary convictions.

Excerpt

A Rutherford County jury convicted the defendant, German Calles, of one count of attempted voluntary manslaughter, four counts of aggravated assault while acting in concert with others, two counts of attempted especially aggravated robbery, one count of especially aggravated burglary, two counts of employment of a weapon during the commission of a dangerous felony, two counts of conspiracy to commit especially aggravated robbery, and one count of conspiracy to commit especially aggravated burglary, for which the trial court imposed an effective sentence of twenty-six years in confinement. On appeal, the defendant contends the trial court erred when setting the length of his sentences and ordering partial consecutive sentences. Following our review of the record and applicable authorities, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

What This Ruling Means

This case involved German Calles, who was convicted of multiple serious crimes including attempted voluntary manslaughter, aggravated assault, attempted robbery, and burglary. Calles was sentenced to 26 years in prison by a Tennessee trial court and then appealed his conviction and sentence to a higher court. The Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals rejected Calles's appeal and upheld his original conviction and 26-year prison sentence. The appellate court found that the trial court had handled the case properly and that the conviction should stand. For workers, this case appears to be mislabeled as an employment law matter. This is actually a criminal case involving violent crimes, not a workplace dispute or employment rights issue. The case title suggests it may have been incorrectly categorized in legal databases. Workers should note that this ruling doesn't establish any employment law precedent or affect workplace rights. If you're researching employment law cases, this particular case won't provide relevant guidance about workplace issues like wages, discrimination, wrongful termination, or other employment matters. True employment law cases typically involve disputes between workers and employers over workplace conditions, pay, or treatment.

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.