WPC A@a)v)\Xw՟G{xݯ?~fE*{l2]>U\W ^"տmܽ&,LNQ9-0"l}I۽:fqyפېJ18vqw,]C ʥ5NgC)Yy"hJ76@&<YkagM,V_X/rWB}c =,6d"+/GJtFI: }ț"[?%c<=uP!{;yȞFR[ѿ[ۧA75~?0'D%ˢ>-@-mWu9-P% Fz‰ d7:g" 3TPQ-P9vgMQdJ/îO/ L 32uI](1-W7%{Ub#\ % U@# 0c U N z9  ^ w 4   ~ D  N mEb 0 B 0 D3 D- 0K ASL 0e 0D  AMHP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 6,,,,0(I Z(Times New Roman (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regular C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt o+s 8n_+Cbk1T3|xLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5U- -(|G2L$ !.8Fdd8         0   d(|3G$ !.8Fdd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3G$ !.8Fdd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8Fdd8     _  F8XXdd8  FF@ FINTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @kk$ATNASHVILLE#F+#Ԉ &   AssignedonBriefsAugust2,2001 L XXF #FXX#BEN_HAMBRICK_v._DONAL_ԀCAMPBELL,COMMISSIONER J XXF @@ AppealfromtheChanceryCourtforDavidsonCounty  6 @@No.001205IIrvinH._Kilcrease_,Jr.,Chancellor  " @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.M200002907_COA_ԄR3CVFiledNovember15,_2001_   AV) ` dE<h` A i     Aprisonerfiledapetitionforwritofcertiorarimorethansixtydaysaftertheentryoftheorderhe d wasappealingfrom,inviolationofTenn.Code.Ann.279102.Thetrialcourtdismissedthe P petitionbecauseoflackofjurisdiction.Weaffirmthetrialcourt.#FXX#XXF < N Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheChanceryCourt d AffirmedandRemanded  P   #FX#XX.FBenH.Cantrell,P.J.,M.S.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichWilliamC.Koch,Jr. ( andWilliamB.Cain,JJ.,joined.  Ben_Hambrick_,_Petros_,Tennessee,ProSe.  PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneralandReporter;MichaelE.Moore,SolicitorGeneral;Stephanie t R._Reevers_,SeniorCounsel,fortheappellee,StateofTennessee. `  OPINION #FXX#XXF 8!  #FXX8 #XXF  @) I.  #`"   Ben_Hambrick_ԀisaprisonerinthecustodyoftheDepartmentofCorrection.InMarchof $8 $ 1999,hewasissuedthreedisciplinaryinfractionreportsforassaultsonstaffmembersatthe_DeBerry_ %$!% SpecialNeedsFacility,wherehewasincarceratedatthattime.Theinfractionreportswere &"& numbered360514,360487,and360372.OnApril7,theDisciplinaryBoardconductedahearing '"' onthecharges,andfoundMr._Hambrick_Ԁguiltyofallthree. (#(   Therecordbeforeusdoesnotcontainthehearingreport.However,accordingtoMr. p*%* _Hambrick_spetition,theBoardrecommendedthathebepunishedbylossof18monthssentence \+&+  credits,80days inthehole,a$10fineandthat60%beaddedtohisReleaseEligibilityDate. H,', Accordingtohisappellatebrief,thepunishmentincludedonly30days intheholeandthelossof  9monthsofsentencecredits.     Mr._Hambrick_ԀappealedallthreedecisionstoWardenFloraHolland,whoaffirmedthem. t HethenattemptedtoappealtotheCommissionerofCorrection.OnApril26,Assistant ` CommissionerJimRosereturnedtheappealsonincidents360514and360487toMr._Hambrick_, L  notingthatnoactionhadbeentaken,becausenorecordofthoseincidentswasfoundonthe 8  departmentalcomputersystem.OnApril27,Commissioner_Donal_ԀCampbellaffirmedtheBoards $ t decisiononinfraction360372.  `   OnApril17,2000,Mr._Hambrick_ԀfiledaPetitionforWritofCertiorariintheChanceryCourt  8  ofDavidsonCounty.Hispetitionallegednumerousviolationsofhisdueprocessrightsbythe $  DisciplinaryBoard.Mr._Hambrick_ԀalsoclaimedthathewasnotinformedthattheCommissioner   hadaffirmedtheBoardsdecisiononinfraction360372untilFebruaryof2000.     TheDepartmentfiledaMotiontoDismiss,orAlternativelyforSummaryJudgmenton   September15,2000,accompaniedbytheaffidavitofthecorrectionalemployeewhoprocesses p disciplinaryappealsmadetotheCommissionersoffice.Thebasisofthemotionwasthatthe \ petitionwasfiledinexcessofthesixtydaystatutorytimelimitforwritsofcertiorari. H   Mr._Hambrick_ԀfiledaResponseinOppositiontotheMotion,whichstatedthat plaintiffis  p notseekingreviewofdeaddisciplinaryinfraction#360372,butallremaininginfractions,  \ #00360514,00360487arguablyarestillalive.ThechancerycourtfiledaMemorandumandOrder H onOctober25,dismissingMr._Hambrick_spetitionforuntimeliness.Thisappealfollowed. 4 @) II.      Thecommonlawwritofcertiorarienablesacourttoorderaninferiortribunaltosendupa  completerecordforreview,sothatthecourtcandeterminewhetherthattribunalhasexceededits  jurisdiction,orhasactedillegally,fraudulentlyorarbitrarily._Yokley_Ԁv.State,632S.W.2d123,126 l (Tenn.Ct.App.1981).Thereviewingcourtmaynotinquireintotheintrinsiccorrectnessofthe X  decisionbelow,butonlythemannerinwhichthatdecisionwasreached.Powellv.ParoleEligibility D! ReviewBoard,879S.W.2d871,873(Tenn.Ct.App.1994). 0"    Ourlegislaturehasdecreedthattoobtainthewrit,apartymustfilehispetitionwithinsixty $X" daysfromtheentryoftheorderorjudgmentappealedfrom.Tenn.CodeAnn.279102.Failure $D # tofilethepetitionwithinthestatutorytimelimitresultsintheorderbecomingfinal.Oncethe %0!$ decisionisfinal,thecourtcannotruleuponit,becauseithasbeendeprivedofjurisdiction. &"% _Thandiwe_Ԁv._Traughber_,909S.W.2d802(Tenn.Ct.App.1994);Wheelerv.CityofMemphis,685 '#& S.W.2d4(Tenn.Ct.App.1984).  (#'   Inthepresentcase,Mr._Hambrick_Ԁapparentlyconcedesthathispetitionwasuntimelyin |*%) regardtoinfraction360372,foritwasfiledmorethanelevenmonthsaftertheCommissionersApril h+&* 27,1999decisionaffirmingtheDisciplinaryBoardsdetermination.Hecontends,however,thathis  petitionremainedtimelyinregardtoinfractions360514and360487becausetheCommissioner  neveractedonhisappeal.    Itistrue,asMr._Hambrick_Ԁargues,thathisappealonthosetwoinfractionswasreturnedto ` himwithnoactiontaken,throughnofaultofhisown.However,thereisnothingintherecordto L  indicatethathemadeanysubsequentattempttorenewhisappeal.TheUniformDisciplinary 8  ProceduresoftheDepartmentofCorrectionstateat#502.01(F)that [_o]nly_Ԁtheinmate(orthe $ t advisorattheinmatesrequest)mayappealadecisionofthedisciplinaryboard,andfurther,that  `  [_i]t_Ԁistheresponsibilityoftheinmate,nottheinmateadvisor,toensurethatanyappealisprocessed  L  andthatanysuchappealadherestothetimelimits.  8    WhentheAssistantCommissionernotifiedMr._Hambrick_Ԁthathisappealcouldnotbe   processedbecausethenecessaryrecordsontheDepartmentscomputercouldnotbefound,thatmay   haveservedtotolltheusual15daytimelimitrequiredbytheDisciplinaryRulesforappealstothe   Commissioner,butitdidnotexcusetheappellantfromattemptingtofileanotherappeal.     Itappearstousthatthroughhisinaction,Mr._Hambrick_Ԁwaivedhisrighttoappealtothe \ Commissioner,therebyallowingtheBoardsdecisiontobecomefinalwithouttheCommissioners H assent.Inlightofthepeculiarfactsofthiscase,wewillnotattempttodetermineexactlywhenthe 4 Boardsdecisionbecamefinal,thusstartingthesixtydaycountdownforthefilingofapetitionfor  p writofcertiorari.ButsincemorethanayearpassedbetweentheBoardsdecisionandthefilingof  \ thepetition,wehavenodoubtthatthefilingdidnotmeetthetimerequirementsofTenn.CodeAnn. H 279102,andthatthechancellorwascorrectindismissingthepetitionforlackofjurisdiction. 4 @^^( III.      Theorderofthetrialcourtisaffirmed.RemandthiscausetotheChanceryCourtof  DavidsonCountyforfurtherproceedingsconsistentwiththisopinion.Taxthecostsonappealto  theappellant,Ben_Hambrick._Ԁ#FXX #XXF l    `     h   _________________________________________ #l!    `     h   BENH.CANTRELL,PRESIDINGJUDGE,M.S.