Appellate panel hears challenge to Smith convictions over Miranda waiver, premeditation and venue

Allard Lorenzo Smith’s convictions for first-degree murder, attempted first-degree murder, felony murder and aggravated assault were the subject of oral argument before an appellate panel on an appeal that centers on whether Smith’s January statement should have been suppressed and whether the state proved premeditation and an imminent fear for the aggravated assault count.

Raymond Priam Morris, of the Appellate Division of the Public Defender's Conference, representing Smith, told the court that “the trial court erred in refusing to suppress statements made by Mr. Smith” because, he argued, the totality of the circumstances show an “unknowing and unintelligent Miranda waiver.” Morris said two clinical psychologists concluded Smith was impaired by withdrawal from alcohol and Xanax and that some withdrawal effects “would not be apparent based on the mere observation of someone's outward expression.” He emphasized that Smith was placed on suicide watch seven hours before the interrogation and that the recorded interview lasted about two hours and 25 minutes.

Morris asked the court to review the suppression ruling de novo, saying the trial court misapplied the law by relying primarily on the officers’ testimony and the interrogation video instead of the full record, which included expert testimony, medical and mental-health history, and custodial incidents. He also argued that Smith’s aggravated-assault conviction must be vacated because the alleged victim, Dion Walker, was in Nashville (Davidson County) while the shootings occurred in Madison County and therefore there was no proof Walker faced an “immediate real threat.” On the murder counts, Morris argued the evidence supported a reduction to voluntary manslaughter because, he said, Smith acted in the “state of passion produced by adequate provocation.”

Jacob Durst, arguing for the State of Tennessee, told the panel “the court should affirm the jury's verdicts and the trial court's decision to admit the confession.” Durst said the trial court’s findings are binding on the appellate court unless the evidence preponderates otherwise and argued officers with field experience were in the best position to assess Smith’s outward presentation on the recording. Durst noted the experts relied heavily on Smith’s self-reporting and that the video and jail reports corroborated the trial court’s account that Smith was coherent and capable of understanding his rights.

Judges pressed both sides on discrete legal questions. Judge Montgomery questioned how an aggravated-assault conviction could stand where the alleged victim was more than 100 miles away and initially unaware of the shootings, calling the fact pattern potentially novel. The panel also explored whether the jury could reasonably infer premeditation from a sequence the state described: an initial shooting at one residence, a roughly 20-minute drive, and a second shooting at another house from an elevated position where a victim sustained multiple gunshot wounds. The panel asked whether that sequence permitted an inference of reflection and planning or was instead consistent with provoked, passionate conduct.

Both sides acknowledged factual complexity: the record includes testimony that officers recovered about 10 shell casings at the first scene, that the two shooting incidents occurred in the early morning hours of Dec. 16, and that Smith was apprehended about 40 days later. The state argued the jury could draw circumstantial inferences from motive, travel between scenes, changing tactics between the two shootings and the locations targeted. The defense argued the absence of proof that Smith confronted Walker directly, and that the victim’s distance undermines the “imminence” requirement for aggravated assault.

No ruling was announced at argument. The panel asked for — and the parties discussed the possibility of — supplemental briefing on venue and related questions. The court recessed after argument and took the case under advisement.