Skip to main content

State of Tennessee v. Javier Alexander Rivas and Hayden S. Fryer

TENNCRIMAPPApril 27, 2021No. M2019-02241-CCA-R3-CD

Case Details

Judge(s)
Judge Robert L. Holloway, Jr.
Status
Published
Procedural Posture
Appeal from trial court conviction and sentencing; appellate affirmation

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Outcome

The Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the trial court's convictions and sentencing of both defendants for first degree murder, attempted murder, burglary, and firearm offenses. The appellate court rejected all challenges to severance, suppression of statements, sufficiency of evidence, and consecutive sentencing.

Excerpt

Javier Alexander Rivas ("Defendant Rivas") and Hayden S. Fryer ("Defendant Fryer") (or collectively "the Defendants") were each convicted by a Davidson County jury for first degree felony murder, first degree premediated murder, attempted aggravated burglary, reckless endangerment with a deadly weapon, burglary of an automobile, two counts of employing a firearm during the commission of a dangerous felony, and two counts of attempted first degree murder, for which the trial court sentenced both Defendant Rivas and Defendant Fryer to a total effective sentence of life plus fifty-two years. On appeal, Defendant Rivas argues that: (1) the trial court erred in denying his motion for severance of offenses (2) the trial court erred in denying his motion to suppress his statements to police (3) the evidence is insufficient to support his convictions and (4) the trial court abused its discretion by ordering consecutive sentencing. Defendant Fryer challenges the sufficiency of the evidence as it relates to his convictions for first degree premeditated murder and attempted aggravated burglary. Following a thorough review, we affirm the judgments of the trial court.

What This Ruling Means

**What Happened:** This case involved two defendants, Javier Alexander Rivas and Hayden S. Fryer, who were convicted of serious violent crimes including first-degree murder, attempted murder, burglary, and firearm offenses. The defendants appealed their convictions to the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals, challenging various aspects of their trial including how evidence was handled and whether their sentences were appropriate. **What the Court Decided:** The Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals upheld all the original convictions and sentences for both defendants. The appeals court rejected every challenge the defendants raised, including their arguments about evidence suppression, whether there was enough evidence to convict them, and complaints about their consecutive sentences. **Why This Matters for Workers:** Despite being categorized as an employment law case, this appears to be a criminal case that doesn't directly impact workplace rights or employment protections. The classification may be an error in the case database. Workers looking for guidance on employment issues should focus on cases that specifically address workplace disputes, discrimination, wage and hour violations, or other employment-related matters rather than criminal proceedings.

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.