NASHVILLE, Tenn. – The Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals has upheld the conviction of Joshua Terelle Gaines, whose case drew national attention for the unusual evidence found at the crime scene — and in the getaway vehicle.
Gaines was convicted of first degree felony murder, especially aggravated robbery, and being a felon in possession of a firearm in the 2018 killing of his aunt, Tivvis Garrison. He was sentenced to life plus five years in prison.
On February 3, 2018, Garrison’s nephew and Gaines’s half-brother discovered her body in her home. She had been shot five times. Police later found pieces of raw sweet potato on her bed and bedroom floor, whole sweet potatoes on the kitchen counter, and partially cooked pieces on the kitchen floor.
During the investigation, authorities learned that Gaines had taken his half-brother’s Cadillac CTS and fled. When police stopped the vehicle, they found two of the victim’s purses in the trunk — one containing a piece of raw sweet potato and a washcloth. A revolver matching the murder weapon was located on the driver’s floorboard.
Forensic testimony revealed that the sweet potatoes were not a coincidence. Dr. Miguel Laboy, who performed the autopsy, testified that “a solid object, such as a sweet potato, placed between the muzzle of a gun and a victim could impede stippling on the victim.” MNPD lead investigator Sgt. Zachariah Bevis went further, estimating Gaines used “three to five sweet potatoes during the shooting.” Firearms expert Don Carman confirmed information on using sweet potatoes as silencers was available online and demonstrated that firing through one caused it to “blow everywhere.”
Prosecutors argued this preparation showed planning. Dr. Mary Elizabeth Wood, a forensic psychiatrist for the State, testified that the most critical factor in rejecting an insanity defense was Gaines’s deliberate use of the sweet potatoes: obtaining them from another room, cutting holes, and placing them on the gun. She said these actions demonstrated “the capacity to engage in insight and reflective judgment” despite his mental illness.
The same doctor was able to recall seven words that evidently stuck with her. Those seven words came at the end of a recorded jailhouse phone-call with Gaines stating to the person on the other end of the line, “It’s looking good for my insanity plea.”
Gaines appealed, claiming the trial court improperly limited his psychological expert’s testimony and redacted parts of the expert’s report. The appellate court found no abuse of discretion, ruling that the excluded material was either hearsay, irrelevant to diminished capacity, or more prejudicial than probative. The court concluded the jury heard sufficient evidence to consider his mental state, and even if errors occurred, they were harmless given the overwhelming proof.
The Clerk of the Appellate Courts filed the response late last week. With the ruling, Gaines’s life-plus-five-year sentence remains in place. His sentence will come to an end in year 2081.
