Appeals panel hears challenge to 8‑year, 100% sentence for Paul Rogers; defense seeks findings on split confinement

An appellate panel heard oral arguments in State of Tennessee v. Paul Rogers over whether the trial court erred by ordering Rogers to serve an eight‑year sentence at 100% instead of a lesser alternative such as split confinement or probation.

Autumn Bowling, counsel for appellant Paul Rogers, told the court she raised three issues on appeal, centering her argument on the manner in which the trial judge imposed the sentence. "There is no reason on the record or explanation or finding that split confinement would not have been an appropriate sentence," Bowling said, urging that the Sentencing Act requires imposing "the least severe measure necessary" and that the trial court failed to make the required, case‑specific findings to justify full confinement.

Bowling told the panel the facts leading to the underlying plea included officers running plates at a gas station, a vehicle pursuit on an interstate, and a vehicle collision with a patrol car. Rogers pleaded guilty by information to nine…