State v. Houston
Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals
900 S.W.2d 712 (1995)
- Written by Sharon Feldman, JD
Facts
Freddie Houston (defendant) was a police captain responsible for scheduling police officers to appear in the city court. Houston had an argument with the court administrator for the city court clerk’s office. The court administrator tried to walk away several times, but Houston followed him, called him a bastard, and yelled at him to stand up like a man. The court administrator finally cursed at Houston. Houston responded by striking the court administrator in the face, breaking the administrator’s jaw and two teeth. The grand jury indicted Houston for misdemeanor assault. Houston requested pretrial diversion. Although the district attorney acknowledged that Houston had an excellent work record and social history, he denied pretrial diversion because Houston was a captain with the police department and had to be held to a higher standard than ordinary citizens, the victim was a court official who was performing his duties when Houston attacked him, the victim suffered serious injuries, Houston was armed with a deadly weapon, and the victim tried to retreat but Houston pursued him. Houston petitioned for a writ of certiorari overturning the district attorney’s denial of pretrial diversion. After a hearing, the trial court affirmed the district attorney’s decision. Houston appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Hayes, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 810,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.