George A. Ruff, Appellant v. State of Tennessee, Appellee; Billy Joe Smith, Appellant, v. State of Tennessee, Appellee

Summary

The Tennessee Supreme Court consolidated the appeals of George Ruff and Billy Joe Smith to decide whether indictments that fail to charge a specific culpable mental state are valid, and held under its controlling decision in State v. Hill that every challenged indictment was sufficient because it gave constitutionally adequate notice, satisfied the statutory form requirements, and permitted the requisite mental state to be inferred from the conduct alleged. The Court further held that a Department of Human Services investigator's repetition of the child victim's statements was inadmissible hearsay, but that the error was harmless in light of the strength of the direct testimony. Finally, it held that the trial court did not err in denying Smith an ex parte hearing and state-funded independent psychiatric evaluation, because he failed to make the threshold showing of particularized need required for expert assistance. In ruling, the Court expressly overruled State v. Hughes to the extent it conflicts with Hill and declared the strict common-law pleading requirements relaxed.