State v. Tweedy - Initiation of a Process and Manufacture of Meth Must be Based on Separate Facts

State v. Tweedy - Initiation of a Process and Manufacture of Meth Must be Based on Separate Facts



By Stevie Phillips
meth case 
Anthony Laren Tweedy, II was convicted of initiation of a process to manufacture methamphetamine and manufacture of methamphetamine.  On appeal, he argued that his conviction for manufacture of methamphetamine should be reversed. 

The Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals applied plain error review and determined that Tweedy was improperly convicted of both initiation of a process to manufacture methamphetamine and manufacture of methamphetamine.

Tweedy was convicted for initiation of a process intended to result in the manufacture of methamphetamine under T.C.A. section 39-17-435.  That statute provides that “[a] person may not be prosecuted for a violation of this section and of manufacturing a controlled substance in violation of § 39-17- 417 based upon the same set of facts.”

The Court found that Tweedy was prosecuted under both sections 39-17-435 and -417 and that the convictions were based on the same set of facts.  Here, the State agreed that Tweedy should not have been convicted of both offenses and further agreed that the manufacture of methamphetamine conviction should be reversed.  Accordingly, the Court reversed and dismissed Tweedy’s conviction for manufacture of methamphetamine.

A full opinion can be found here.  
Categories:

Contact Davis & Hoss, PC

  • Please enter your first name.
  • Please enter your last name.
  • This isn't a valid phone number.
  • Please enter your email address.
    This isn't a valid email address.
  • Please make a selection.
  • Please enter a message.