WPC X# UN %9 04? 0sw@@4 m 0Db 0J 0TRj 0^ 0hv 0r 0|P 0 0R 1u 0dW AQ  0D 0@ 0DV D/ B D3U>B)WDC AMU*K:x{v~xv BHP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLl'"  Z 6Times New Roman Regular( U$  (}(2$ U!   XXNX   `   0   DDD-eӀ_#3|xU(#$  0  - -2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  ringling v. bd. of paroles - opinion    '  0 .   2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23   ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X!"#$&C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3$ !  ("$    ($$   1  ((' dxdP PdWWWW'dxd<  9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d....7Border 1dd!#/C << G<  9p`(Arial A !  #d#--   ""  11   YYY FILED1XNovember19,1997CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerk   n !#d#--   $   X -X         _Arnoldv.TennesseeBd.ofParoles,App.No.01S019610CH00210,1997WL693708,at*2(Tenn.Nov.10,1997). q !#d#--   $   X -X         _Indealingsbetweenprivateparties,makingapromiseoffutureactionwithnopresentintenttoperformisconsideredpromissoryfraud.See_Axline_Ԁv._Kutner_,863S.W.2d421,423(Tenn.Ct.App.1993);OakRidgePrecisionIndus.,Inc.v.FirstTenn.Bank,835S.W.2d25,28(Tenn.Ct.App.1992).PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'`Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   ion-F Geneva  ion-F Geneva  d ! . --         X \RA'\\RA'\7dXXd7-  ћ @ INTHECOURTOFAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE̜!R02/A1-j|D`  `@Rߛ@ MIDDLESECTIONATNASHVILLE- CHRISTOPHERC.RINGLING,  )       ) Plaintiff/Appellant,   )       ) DavidsonCircuitVS.       ) No.96C1559       )       ) AppealNo.TENNESSEEBOARDOFPAROLES, ) 01A019708CV00416       ) Defendant/Appellee.   )@ APPEALFROMTHECIRCUITCOURTFORDAVIDSONCOUNTY@ ATNASHVILLE,TENNESSEE@ THEHONORABLETHOMASW.BROTHERS,JUDGEForthePlaintiff/Appellant:    FortheDefendant/Appellee:ChristopherC.Ringling,ProSe   JohnKnoxWalkup        AttorneyGeneralandReporter        JohnR.Miles        CounselfortheState@ -AFFIRMEDANDREMANDED -        WILLIAMC.KOCH,JR.,JUDGE    -@ OPINION - Thisappealinvolvesaprisonerseffortstobereleasedonparoleinaccordancewiththetermsofhispleabargainagreement.AftertheTennesseeBoardofParolesdeclinedtoreleasehimonparole,theprisonerfiledapetitionforcommonlawwritofcertiorariintheCircuitCourtforDavidsonCountyallegingthattheBoardhadactedarbitrarilyandillegallybyfailingtohonorthetermsofhispleaagreement.Thetrialcourt,treatingtheBoardsmotiontodismissasoneforsummaryjudgment,dismissedthepetition,andtheprisonerhasappealed.Whilethetrialcourtshouldnothaveconvertedthemotion,wehavedeterminedthattheprisonerspetitionshouldbedismissedforfailuretostateaclaimuponwhichreliefcanbegranted.@ I.  InNovember1987Christopher_Ringling_ԀpleadedguiltytoachargeofaggravatedsexualbatteryintheCriminalCourtforBentonCounty.Mr._Ringling_ԀreceivedatwentyyearsentenceinreturnforhisguiltypleaandiscurrentlyincarceratedintheLakeCountyRegionalCorrectionalFacilityin_Tiptonville_.Whenhefirstbecameeligibleforparoleconsiderationin1990,theTennesseeBoardofParolesdeclinedtoparolehimbecauseoftheseverityofhisoffenseandthehighriskthathemight_reoffend_. Mr._Ringling_ԀviewedtheBoardsrefusaltoparolehimasaviolationofthetermsofhispleaagreement.InApril1996,hefiledapetitionforcommonlawwritofcertiorariintheCircuitCourtforDavidsonCountyallegingthathehadagreedtopleadguiltyinreturnfortheStatesagreementthathewouldbeparoledafterservingthirtypercentofhissentence.Inlaterpleadings,Mr._Ringling_ԀmodifiedhisclaimtoallegethattheStatehadagreedthathewouldbecomeeligibletobeconsideredforparoleafterservingthirtypercentofhissentenceandthattheBoardhadimproperlyfailedtoexerciseitsdiscretiontoreleasehim. TheBoardrespondedtoMr._Ringling_sclaimswithaTenn.R.Civ.P.12.02motiontodismiss.Thereupon,thetrialcourtinvitedthepartiestofile supportingandopposingdocumentationoftheirclaimsanddefensesandstatedthatitwouldtreatthemotiontodismissasamotionforsummaryjudgmentinaccordancewithTenn.R.Civ.P.12.02.Asfarastherecordshows,neitherpartysubmittedadditionalevidentiarymattersoutsidetheirpleadings.OnMarch19,1997,thetrialcourtconvertedtheBoardsmotiontodismisstoamotionforsummaryjudgment,foundthattherequirementsofTenn.R.Civ.P.56weremet,andsummarilydismissedMr._Ringling_spetition.@ II.  Beforeaddressingthesubstanceofthisappeal,wemustaddressaproceduralissueaffectingthestandardbywhichwewillreviewthetrialcourtsdecision.TheBoardsinitialmotionrequestedthatMr._Ringling_smotionbedismissed pursuanttoRule12.02oftheTennesseeRulesofCivilProcedure.ThismotiondidnotcomplywithTenn.R.Civ.P.7.02(1)becauseitdidnot statewithparticularitythegroundstherefor.Whileweassumethatthesegroundsmayverywellhavebeenstatedinamemorandumoflawattachedtothemotion,thismemorandumoflawhasnotbeenincludedintheappellaterecordinaccordancewithTenn.R.App.P.24(a).Becausetheappellaterulesexcludetrialbriefsandmemorandaoflawfromtheappellaterecord,itisbetterpracticetoincludethegroundsofamotioninthebodyofthemotionitself. NotwithstandingtheshortcomingsoftheBoardsmotion,weassumethatthemotionsoughtadismissalforfailuretostateaclaimuponwhichreliefcanbegrantedinaccordancewithTenn.R.Civ.P.12.02(6).Thisruleallowsthetrialcourttoconsider mattersoutsidethepleadings,butthetrialcourtmusttreatthemotiontodismissasamotionforsummaryjudgmentifitdoesso.See_Hixson_Ԁv._Stickley_,493S.W.2d471,473(Tenn.1973);PacificEasternCorp.v.GulfLifeHoldingCo.,902S.W.2d946,952(Tenn.Ct.App.1995).Ifthepartiesdonotpresentmattersoutsidethepleadings,thetrialcourthasnobasisforconvertingamotiontodismisstoamotionforsummaryjudgment. ThetrialcourtshouldnothaveconvertedtheBoardsmotiontodismisstoamotionforsummaryjudgmentbecause,asfarastherecordonappealshows,neitherMr._Ringling_ԀnortheBoardsubmittedmattersoutsidetheirpleadings.Accordingly,wewillreviewthetrialcourtsdecisionasanordergrantingamotiontodismissforfailuretostateaclaimuponwhichreliefcanbegranted.Amotiontodismissshouldbegrantedonlywhenthecomplaintstatesnofactsthatwouldentitletheclaimanttorelief.SeeFletcherv.Boardof_Profl_Responsibility,915S.W.2d448,450(Tenn.Ct.App.1995).CourtsconsideringaTenn.R.Civ.P.12.02(6)motionmusttakeallwellpleadedallegationsinthecomplaintastrueandmustconstruethecomplaintliberallyintheplaintiffsfavor.SeeCookv.Spinnakersof_Rivergate_,Inc.,878S.W.2d934,938(Tenn.1994);_Rampy_Ԁv._ICI_ԀAcrylics,Inc.,898S.W.2d196,198(Tenn.Ct.App.1994).@ III.  Personsfilingapetitionforcommonlawwritofcertiorariareentitledtojudicialreliefinrelativelylimitedcircumstances.Theycansucceedonlybydemonstratingthatthelowertribunalexceededitsjurisdictionoractedillegally,fraudulently,orarbitrarily.SeeArnoldv.TennesseeBd.ofParoles,___S.W.2d___,___(Tenn.1997). 3   ׀Thecourtswillnotuseacommonlawwritofcertioraritoreviewtheinternalcorrectnessofalowertribunalsdecisionandwillgrantreliefonlyifthedecisionbeingreviewedwasarrivedatinanunconstitutionalorunlawfulmanner.SeePowellv.ParoleEligibilityReviewBd.,879S.W.2d871,873(Tenn.Ct.App.1994). Thiscaseisnotthefirstoccasionwhenwehaveconsideredclaimsconcerningthe_enforceability_Ԁofpleabargainagreements.InlightoftheTennesseeSupremeCourtsclearandunequivocalholdingthatpleaagreements,onceapprovedbythetrialcourt,becomebindingandenforceablecontracts,seeStatev._Howington_,907S.W.2d403,407(Tenn.1995),wehavedecidedprisonerswhoenterintoandabidebythetermsofapleaagreementshouldbeabletoseekjudicialredressiftheStatebreachesthecontract.See_Totty_Ԁv.Tennessee_Dept_ԀofCorrection,App.No.01A019504CV00139,1995WL700205,at*2(Tenn.Ct.App.Nov.29,1995)(NoTenn.R.App.P.11applicationfiled).FortheStatetonegotiateapleabargainontermsthatitiseitherunpreparedorunabletohonorraisesseriousdueprocessconcernsaffectingthevalidityofthepleabargainingprocess._ 4   _ԀThus,withproperproof,aprisonermaybeentitledtospecificenforcementofhisorherpleabargainagreement. TheprecisenatureofMr._Ringling_scomplaintisnotclearbecausehistheoryhasshiftedseveraltimesduringtheproceeding.Atfirst,heassertedthattheStatehadbreacheditsagreementthathewouldbeparoledafterservingthirtypercentofhissentence.Later,heassertedthattheStatehadbreacheditsagreementthathewouldbeconsideredforparoleafterservingthirtypercentofhissentence.Thereisasubstantialdifferencebetweenagreeingtoparolesomeoneafterthatpersonhasservedaspecificportionofasentenceandmerelyagreeingtoconsidersomeoneforparole. Prisonerswhoassertthattheyagreedtopleadguiltyinreturnforagreementsthattheywouldbeparoledafterservingaspecificportionoftheirsentencesmustcomeforwardwithsomecompetentevidenceoftheseagreements.ThisevidenceisreadilyavailableeitherintheformofawrittenpleabargainagreementorintheformofaverbatimrecordofthepleabargainproceedingrequiredtobekeptpursuanttoTenn.R._Crim_.P.11(g).Withoutthisevidence,aprisonerhasfailedtostateaclaimuponwhichreliefcanbegranted.EventhoughthetrialcourtgaveMr._Ringling_Ԁanopportunitytosubmitdocumentationtosubstantiatehisclaim,Mr._Ringling_Ԁhasfailedtocomeforwardwithanyevidenceofapleabargainagreement,approvedbyacourt,statingthathewouldbeparoledafterservingthirtypercentofhissentenceinreturnforhisguiltyplea.Accordingly,hehasfailedtostateaclaimuponwhichreliefcanbegrantedastothistheory. Mr._Ringling_ԀhaslikewisefailedtostateaclaimuponwhichreliefcanbegrantedregardinghisclaimthattheBoardimproperlyfailedtoexerciseitsdiscretiontogranthimparole.Mr._Ringling_sowncomplaintstatesthattheBoardhasconsideredhimforparole;accordingly,theStatehasnotviolatedanagreementtoconsiderhimforparoleafterheservedthirtypercentofhissentence.Mr._Ringling_srequestthatthecourtsreviewtheBoardsdiscretionarydecisionnottoparolehimalsofailstostateaclaimforwhichreliefpursuanttoacommonlawwritofcertioraricanbegrantedbecausecommonlawwritsofcertioraricannotbeusedtoinquireintothecorrectnessofthelowertribunalsdecision.SeeStateexrel._McMorrow_Ԁv.Hunt,137Tenn.243,25051,192_S.W._931,933(1917);Flowersv._Traughber_,910S.W.2d468,470(Tenn._Crim_.App.1995).@ IV.  WeaffirmthejudgmentdismissingMr._Ringling_spetitionandremandthecasetothetrialcourtforwhateverotherproceedingsmayberequired.WealsotaxthecostsofthisappealtoChristopher_Ringling_Ԁforwhichexecution,ifnecessary,may_issue._       _____________________________       WILLIAMC.KOCH,JR.,JUDGECONCUR:_________________________________HENRYF.TODD,PRESIDINGJUDGEMIDDLESECTION_________________________________SAMUELL.LEWIS,JUDGE