ÿWPC%9 É—F¾¦¡,ôbsßàLçsö-ãtÒhPSÛT†TkÁ] ,Ö%Ý\Y# ¿×o«ÂÖ,èBú çÎP—ååF¼çy@Cªv÷—*FéÞ×ú ’Jow|9ý ;«Ê„,sÖw?kBN˜±¶ûˆÆ{ $Ï9SÞ>1S.¥@ "pž`ª3¹æ¶^ÚMî$ójIQ¿xù-ƒ`kîéË\¸š|ÔçŽ~„bQæ¿§ÅòŠnuJÍèJ3Ú=0’6v<)»z·÷™‹h¶ÝÕ@Úlæu¼©éõ¥”,E·üÅÏQ7Èq›ÉŽŠAŠÂ£²é*5âªÏfÄÚËf ”ÙgÀ;â™FÁ½y„Cا<`>ð‹¢îUQ´lˆˆÉy9Óð^ÐIú•ç*ððöÒï[0½Rþ†OGe•< E˜Aó7ñ¸='ß1#æDLoÙG›Ù¶l!,3lŠòA·7M#@Ë’¦Þøß,¦ædŠâ–Õ¿þã´ð‹QÀįQy\~¾ç}l'-ÐŒ’8+ÞCïeZ‰³vWos×Zô-ü“þ¹g±C’öQí ¨9˜‚èó×WoŒ–vLébÿqêý(n¢Ì0M3|Ül4¼Ø_JŽÕTäJ£Çbv´ØÙy ]` %@^ F 0ÜRU:. wh 4l € N ‘ m“ #Áª 0 !k 0 DŒ 4Ð Èk̸7ïïïïï?÷÷÷6$üQ*Q*Q*Q*Q*$M1M1M1M1M1M1M1q5q5q5q5q5q5q5q5q5q5q5q5q5q5q5 0Vy5y5QÏ5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5Ï5 AS 7Æs7 0V98 B8 0D¬8¬8 D5ð8X¹4(L (´`$¡¡Ñ°ÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€‰GXXdðXXdð7ÑÑ  Ñ, øð AZ‹"Arial Regular¬sp'bk2@£3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ˜HP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL 6ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0(Ñ(3J)$¤¤Ý ƒ`!ÝѰÑÒ°ÒÑTR[ì AØ'ÿ LegalXà3Ø' Letter  AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ8€ zXXdædæ8ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ýà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó *Ô_ÔÔ‡ô¡òXXÔÝ ƒ J)ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒ°ÒÑT@R[ì AØ'ÿ LegalXà3Ø' Letter  AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ8À zXXdædæ8ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝAlthough€not€before€this€court€in€the€present€proceedings,€we€note€that,€on€March€10,Ð  Ð1988,€the€appellant€was€convicted€of€felony€murder€and€two€counts€of€robbery€with€a€deadlyРƾ Ðweapon€and€was€ultimately€sentenced€to€death€by€a€Shelby€County€jury.€€These€convictions€andÐ „| Ðsentences€were€subsequently€affirmed€by€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court.€€òòSeeóó€€òòState€v.€Boydóó,Ð B : Ð797€S.W.2d€589€(Tenn.€1990),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€498€U.S.€1974,€111€S.Ct.€800€(1991).€€Evidence€of€theÐ  ø Ðappellantððs€conviction€for€second€degree€murder,€which€is€challenged€in€the€case€òòsub€judiceóó,€wasÐ ¾ ¶ Ðpresented€to€the€jury€as€evidence€in€support€of€the€(i)(2)€aggravator. ¾Ô_ÔÔ‡ô¡òXXÔÝ ƒ J)ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒ°ÒÑT@R[ì AØ'ÿ LegalXà3Ø' Letter  AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ8À zXXdædæ8ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ#†X zXòô¡#ÔÔ‡ô¡òXX zÔThe€appellant€filed€petitions€for€post„conviction€relief€on€March€1,€1988,€challenging€theÐ  Ðvalidity€of€his€October€8,€1979,€guilty€pleas€to€two€counts€of€petit€larceny,€one€count€of€sexualРƾ Ðbattery,€and€one€count€of€attempted€burglary;€his€April€7,€1983,€guilty€pleas€to€one€count€ofÐ „| Ðfraudulent€use€of€a€credit€card€and€one€count€of€receiving€a€stolen€credit€card;€and€his€October€17,Ð B : Ð1983,€guilty€pleas€to€possession€of€marijuana,€one€count€of€petit€larceny,€and€one€count€of€secondÐ  ø Ðdegree€murder. aÔ_ÔÔ‡ô¡òXXÔÝ ƒ J)ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒ°ÒÑT@R[ì AØ'ÿ LegalXà3Ø' Letter  AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ8À zXXdædæ8ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝòòCompare€withóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„202(a)€(1997)€(ð ð[t]he€statute€of€limitations€shallÐ  Ðnot€be€tolled€for€any€reason,€including€any€tolling€or€saving€provision€otherwise€available€at€law€orРƾ Ðequity);€€òòVikki€Lynn€Spellman€v.€Stateóó,€No.€02C01„9801„CC„00036€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Jackson,Ð „| ÐAug.€21,€1998),€òòperm.€to€appeal€grantedóó,€(Tenn.€Mar.€15,€1999)€(Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€28„1„106€notÐ B : Ðapplicable€to€1995€Post„Conviction€Procedure€Act).€€òòSee€generallyóó€€Tenn.€Sup.€Ct.€R.€28€ðð€3(B)Ð  ø Ð(1996)€(ð ð[n]either€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure€nor€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€CriminalÐ ¾ ¶ ÐProcedure€apply€to€post„conviction€proceedings€except€as€specifically€provided€by€these€rulesðð). ®Ô_ÔÔ‡ô¡òXXÔÝ ƒ J)ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒ°ÒÑT@R[ì AØ'ÿ LegalXà3Ø' Letter  AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ8À zXXdædæ8ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThis€rule€has€been€amended€to€delete€the€motion€for€discretionary€costs.€€€òòSeeóó€€Tenn.€R.Ð  ÐCiv.€Pro.€59€(1999).  5Ô_ÔÔ‡ô¡òXXÔÝ ƒ J)ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒ°ÒÑT@R[ì AØ'ÿ LegalXà3Ø' Letter  AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ8À zXXdædæ8ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€post„conviction€court€found€that€the€only€allegation€raising€a€constitutional€claim€wasÐ  Ðthe€appellantððs€contention€that€the€trial€court€failed€to€advise€him€of€his€right€against€self„Рƾ Ðincrimination.€€The€court€specifically€concluded€that€all€other€claims€failed€to€rise€to€a€violation€of€aÐ „| Ðconstitutional€right.€€Thus,€the€post„conviction€court€did€address€all€allegations€raised€in€theÐ B : Ðappellantððs€petition€and€in€his€amended€petition. Ô_ÔÔ‡ô¡òXXÔÝ ƒ J)ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒ°ÒÑT@R[ì AØ'ÿ LegalXà3Ø' Letter  AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ8À zXXdædæ8ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€Post„Conviction€Procedure€Act€expressly€governs€the€commencement€of€post„Ð  Ðconviction€actions,€the€contents€of€the€petition,€the€method€of€service,€the€ability€to€amend€saidРƾ Ðpetitions,€and€the€response€by€the€State.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„30„103;€40„30„Ð „| Ð104;40„30„106;€40„30„107;€40„30„114€[òòrepealed€1995óó].€€The€Act€defines€the€grounds€for€relief,Ð B : Ðdefenses€available€to€the€State€and€the€availability,€scope€and€taking€of€evidence€of€any€hearing.€Ð  ø ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„30„102;€40„30„105;€40„30„109;€40„30„110;€40„30„111;€40„30„112.Ð ¾ ¶ ÐFurthermore,€the€Act€expressly€provides€for€final€disposition€of€petitions€and€any€appealsÐ | t Ðtherefrom,€making€no€reference€to€application€of€any€additional€rules€or€statutes€other€than€theÐ : 2 ÐTennessee€Rules€of€Appellate€Procedure.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„30„118;€„122. òÔ_ÔÔ‡ô¡òXXÔÝ ƒ J)ÿÝÑ@°ÑÒ°ÒÑT@R[ì AØ'ÿ LegalXà3Ø' Letter  AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ8À zXXdædæ8ÑÑ @ Ñà ` àòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝIn€furtherance€of€our€obligation€to€examine€the€nature€of€the€issues€presented€for€review,Ð  Ðwe€note,€again,€that€the€appellant€has€presented€two€issues:€(1)€that€he€was€denied€an€evidentiaryРƾ Ðhearing€on€his€petition€and€(2)€that€his€guilty€pleas€were€unknowingly€entered.€€First,€the€recordÐ „| Ðdoes€not€conclusively€establish€that€the€appellant€was€denied€an€evidentiary€hearing.€€Moreover,Ð B : ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„109(a)(1)€provides€that€ð ð[w]hen€the€petition€has€been€competentlyÐ  ø Ðdrafted€and€all€pleadings,€files€and€records€of€the€case€...€conclusively€show€that€the€petitioner€isÐ ¾ ¶ Ðentitled€to€no€relief,€the€court€may€order€the€petition€dismissed.ðð€€òòSee€alsoóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„Ð | t Ð30„104(b)€(petition€shall€have€attached€affidavits,€record,€or€other€evidence€supporting€itsÐ : 2 Ðallegations);€òòBaxter€v.€Roseóó,€523€S.W.2d€930,€939€(Tenn.€1975).€€A€review€of€the€transcript€of€theÐ ø ð Ðguilty€plea€hearing€shows€that€the€trial€court€advised€the€appellant€of€his€right€against€Ð ¶ ®  Ðself„incrimination.€€Ð tl  Ð Ý ƒ J)$ÝÒ°Òà ` àòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡ô¡òXXÔThe€drafters€of€the€Act€rejected€proposing€an€act€written€in€generic€terms€like€theÐ  ÐNebraska€Post„Conviction€Procedure€Act.€.€.€.€€Instead,€they€proposed€an€act€which€outlines€basicРƾ Ðprocedures,€written€in€specific€terms,€in€an€effort€to€achieve€ð ðclarity€and€simplicity,ðð€ð ðgreaterÐ „| Ðcontrolðð€over€construction,€and€ð ðless€need€for€adjudication€to€clarify€the€[statuteððs]€meaning.ðð€€GaryÐ B : ÐL.€Anderson,€òòPost„Conviction€Relief€in€Tennessee„„Fourteen€Years€of€Judicial€AdministrationÐ  ø ÐUnder€the€Post„Conviction€Procedure€Act,€óó48€Tenn.€L.€Rev.€605,€610€fn.16€(1981)€(citing€F.Ð ¾ ¶ ÐDennis,€Memorandum€to€Law€Revision€Commission€State€of€Tennessee€Relating€to€a€Post„Ð | t ÐConviction€Procedure€Act€for€Tennessee€45„46€(Tenn.€State€Archives)).Ô#†X zXòô¡a#Ô(.3½Ö$££Ý ƒüœ!ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  Ý GÝ ƒ[½Ö"ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ€çXXÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€X zXçÔÐ  ÐÌDecember€21,€1999Ð ˜˜ ÐÌCecil€Ô_ÔCrowsonÔ_Ô,€Jr.Ð dd ÐAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAkÔó óZ[6]_Eþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(.3½Ö$¢¢Ý ƒüœ!ÝÔUSUS.,ÔÝ  Ý d($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó\\\\)ÿÿ!dxdxÝ ƒ`!ÝѰÑÒ°ÒÑTR[ì AØ'ÿ LegalXà3Ø' Letter  AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ8€ zXXdædÈ8ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÓ ÔþÓòòò òÔ_Ôßx€Y8_B2.jzhÿ¾`  `€€@ÿE0Æ` ttx0hð ž xßÔ_Ôà@% % ®àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ  ÐóóÌòòà@$$)®àAT€JACKSONˆÐ ÔÌ ÐóóÌà@MM#®àSEPTEMBER€SESSION,€1999ˆÐ   ˜ ÐÌÌÌÌMICHAEL€JOE€BOYD,à h àà À à*Ð   Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à*à  àNo.€W1999„01981„CCA„R3„PCÐ ü  Ðà ` àAppellant,à  àà h àà À à*Ð êâ  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à*à  àSHELBY€COUNTYÐ ÐÈ  Ðvs.à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à*Ð ¶®  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à*à  àHon.€Carolyn€Wade€Ô_ÔBlackettÔ_Ô,€JudgeÐ œ”  ÐSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à0 h àà À à*Ђz hT$hT$ Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à*à  à(Post„Conviction)Ð h` Ðà ` àAppellee.à  àà h àà À à*Ð NF Ðó óÌÌÌòòFor€the€Appellantóó:à  àà h àà À àà  àòòFor€the€Appelleeóó:Ð æÞ ÐÌò òRobert€Hutton,€Jr.ó óà  àà h àò òà0 À àà0ÀT$ÀT$àPaul€G.€Summersó óвªT$T$ ÐÔ_ÔGlanklerÔ_Ô€Brown€Ô_ÔPLLCÔ_Ôà h àà0 À àà0ÀT$ÀT$àAttorney€General€and€ReporterИT$T$ Ð100€Commerce€Square€„€Suite€1700à  àÐ ~v ÐMemphis,€TN€€38103à h àà0 À àà0ÀT$ÀT$àò òJennifer€L.€Smithó óÐd\T$T$ Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àAssistant€Attorney€Generalà Ð àà (# àÐ JB Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àCriminal€Justice€DivisionÐ 0 ( Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à425€Fifth€Avenue€NorthÐ ! Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à2d€Floor,€Ô_ÔCordellÔ_Ô€Hull€BuildingÐ ü!ô Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àNashville,€TN€37243„0493à x àà Ð àà (# àÐ â"Ú Ðà ` àÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àò òWilliam€L.€Gibbonsó óÐ ”%Œ" Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÐ z&r# ÐÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àò òJohn€Campbelló óÐ F(>!% Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àAsst.€District€Attorney€GeneralÐ ,)$"& Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àCriminal€Justice€Complex€„€Suite€301Ð * #' Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à201€Poplar€AvenueÐ ø*ð#( Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àMemphis,€TN€€38103Ð Þ+Ö$) ÐÌÌÌORDER€FILED:€€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ v/n(- ÐÌAPPEAL€DISMISSEDÐ B1:*/ ÐÌÌÌò òDavid€G.€Hayes,ó ó€JudgeÐ Ú4Ò-3 ÐÐ  À5¸.4 ÐÔ_ÔÓÓà@EE,®àòòò òORDERóóó óˆÐ  ÐÌà ` àThis€appeal€presents€the€collateral€attack€of€a€1983€guilty€plea€to€secondÐ   ˜ Ðdegree€murder.€€In€March€1988,€the€appellant,€Michael€Joe€Boyd,€filed€a€òòpro€seóóÐ l d Ðpetition€for€post„conviction€relief€in€the€Criminal€Court€for€Shelby€County.€€The€post„Ð 80 Ðconviction€court€summarily€dismissed€the€appellantððs€petition€on€February€12,€1990.€Ð ü  ÐAlthough€no€direct€appeal€of€this€order€was€taken,€the€appellant,€on€March€14,€1990,Ð ÐÈ  Ðfiled€a€ð ðMotion€to€Reconsider€and€for€Opportunity€to€Put€on€Testimonial€Proofðð€in€theÐ œ”  Ðpost„conviction€court.€€On€December€7,€1998,€the€court€denied€the€appellantððsÐ h` Ðmotion€on€the€ground€that€it€had€lost€jurisdiction€over€the€matter.€€The€appellant€nowÐ 4, Ðappeals€the€post„conviction€courtððs€rulings€of€February€12,€1990,€and€December€7,Ð ø Ð1998.€€Two€issues€are€raised:Ð ÌÄ ÐÓÓà8 ` àI.€€Whether€the€post„conviction€court€erred€by€failing€to€hold€anÐ ˜ Ðevidentiary€hearing€prior€to€disposing€of€the€appellantððs€petition.Ð~v` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` àII.€€Whether€the€trial€court€failed€to€properly€advise€the€appellant€of€hisÐ JB Ðright€against€self„incrimination€prior€to€accepting€his€guilty€plea€toÐ 0 ( Ðsecond€degree€murder.Ð!` ü!` ü! ÐÌÌÓÓThe€State€argues€that€the€appellant€has€waived€his€right€to€appeal€both€theÐ È#À  ÐDecember€1998€order€and€the€February€1990€order.Ð ”%Œ" ÐÌà ` àAfter€review€of€the€arguments€of€both€parties€and€the€applicable€law,€weÐ ,)$"& Ðconclude€that€the€appellant€has€waived€his€right€to€appeal€the€post„conviction€courtððsÐ ø*ð#( ÐFebruary€1990€order€denying€him€post„conviction€relief.€€Moreover,€we€conclude€thatÐ Ä,¼%* Ðthis€court€does€not€have€the€authority€to€review€the€post„conviction€courtððs€order€ofÐ .ˆ', ÐDecember€1998.€€Accordingly,€this€appeal€is€dismissed.Ð \0T). ÐÌÌà@--%®àò òProcedural€Historyó óˆÐ À5¸.4 ÐÌà ` àOn€March€1,€1988,€the€appellant€filed€nine€petitions€for€post„conviction€relief.€Ð X9P28 ÐAlthough€the€appellantððs€petitions€encompass€nine€separate€convictions,€the€onlyÐ  Ðconviction€challenged€in€this€appeal€is€the€appellantððs€1983€guilty€plea€to€secondÐ ÔÌ Ðdegree€murder.€€Accordingly,€our€review€is€limited€to€this€conviction.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Specifically,Ð   ˜ Ðthe€appellant€alleges€that€his€guilty€plea€to€second€degree€murder€is€invalidÐ l d Ðbecause:Ð 80 ÐÓÓà8 ` à(1)The€Judge€failed€to€advise€me€in€open€court,€on€the€record,€of€myÐ ü  Ðright€not€to€be€compelled€to€incriminate€myself€if€I€had€a€trial.Ðêâ ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` à(2)€€The€Judge€failed€to€advise€me€in€open€court,€on€the€record,€of€theÐ ¶®  Ðmandatory€minimum€and€maximum€penalty€provided€by€law€of€theÐ œ”  Ðcrime€to€which€I€was€charged€and€to€which€I€was€pleading€guilty.Ђz ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` à(3)€€The€Judge€failed€to€advise€me€in€open€court,€on€the€record,€that€heÐ NF Ðor€the€State€may€ask€questions€about€the€offense€to€which€I€pleadÐ 4, Ðguilty€and€that€my€answers€to€these€questions€under€oath,€on€theÐ  Ðrecord,€and€in€the€presence€of€counsel,€if€untruthful€could€result€in€aÐ ø Ðprosecution€for€perjury.ÐæÞ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` à(4)€€The€Judge€failed€to€advise€me€in€open€court,€on€the€record,€thatÐ ²ª Ðthe€conviction€resulting€from€my€guilty€plea€may€be€used€in€aÐ ˜ Ðsubsequent€proceeding€to€enhance€the€punishment€for€subsequentÐ ~v Ðoffenses.Ðd\` ü!` ü! ÐÓéÓÌà ` àThe€appellant€requested€that€his€petitions€for€post„conviction€relief€be€held€inÐ ! Ðabeyance€pending€the€outcome€of€his€appeal€of€his€felony€murder€conviction.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€€€OnÐ â"Ú ÐJune€29,€1988,€the€trial€court€appointed€counsel€and€on,€July€27,€1988,€andÐ ®$¦! ÐSeptember€20,€1988,€appointed€counsel€filed€amendments€to€the€petitions€allegingÐ z&r# Ðas€an€additional€ground€that€ð ðhis€guilty€pleas€are€invalid€in€that€he€was€not€properlyÐ F(>!% Ðadvised€of€his€constitutional€rights€as€mandated€in€òòRounsaville€v.€Stateóó,€733€S.W.2dÐ * #' Ð506€(Tenn.€1987).ðð€€Appointed€counsel€was€permitted€to€withdraw€on€December€14,Ð Þ+Ö$) Ð1988,€and€substitute€counsel€was€designated.€€On€February€12,€1990,€the€post„Ð ª-¢&+ Ðconviction€court€entered,€without€holding€an€evidentiary€hearing,€its€findings€of€factÐ  Ðand€conclusions€of€law€with€respect€to€the€appellantððs€petitions€for€post„convictionÐ ÔÌ Ðrelief.€€Specifically,€the€post„conviction€court€found:Ð   ˜ ÐÓÓà8 ` àPursuant€to€the€authority€of€òòHousleróó€and€òòWallaceóó,€the€Court€finds€that,Ð l d Ðwith€exception€of€the€first€claim€[that€the€trial€court€failed€to€advise€theÐ R J Ðappellant€of€his€right€against€self„incrimination],€none€of€the€assertedÐ 80 Ðgrounds€are€a€proper€basis€for€Post„Conviction€Relief€even€if€they€areÐ   Ðfound€to€be€breached.€€These€claims€go€beyond€the€requirements€ofÐ ü  ÐòòBoykinóó€and€are€therefore€not€constitutionally€based.Ðêâ ` ü!` ü! ÐÌà8 ` àWith€respect€to€petitionerððs€claim€that€he€was€not€advised€of€his€rightÐ ¶®  Ðagainst€self„incrimination€in€a€trial,€the€Court€finds€to€be€without€merit.€Ð œ”  Ð.€.€.€This€Court€has€received€transcripts€of€each€of€the€hearings€and,Ð ‚z  Ðwhere€petitioner€has€failed€to€rebut€the€same,€finds€such€to€be€òòprimaÐ h` Ðfacieóó€evidence€that€he€was€informed€of€this€privilege.ÐNF` ü!` ü! Ðà8 ` à.€.€.Ð4,` ü!` ü! Ðà8 ` àIt€appears,€and€this€Court€finds,€that€petitioner€knowingly€andÐ  Ðintelligently€waived€his€privilege€against€self„incrimination.€€Therefore,Ð ø Ðthere€have€been€no€violations€amounting€to€constitutional€error€and€theÐ æÞ Ðprior€guilty€pleas€were€properly€entered.ÐÌÄ` ü!` ü! ÐÌÓÓÌà ` àSubsequently,€on€March€14,€1990,€the€appellant€filed€in€the€Shelby€CountyÐ d\ ÐCriminal€Court€a€ð ðMotion€to€Reconsider€and€For€Opportunity€to€Put€on€TestimonialÐ 0 ( ÐProof.ðð€€€Essentially,€the€appellant€asserts€in€his€motion€that€because€the€post„Ð ü!ô Ðconviction€court€denied€relief€based,€in€part,€upon€the€appellantððs€failure€to€meet€hisÐ È#À  Ðburden€of€proof,€he€should€be€granted€an€ð ðopportunity€to€put€on€testimonial€proof.ðð€Ð ”%Œ" ÐAdditionally,€the€appellant€argues€that€the€post„conviction€courtððs€findings€failed€toÐ `'X $ Ðaddress€whether€his€guilty€pleas€were€invalid€as€he€was€not€advised€of€theÐ ,)$"& Ðconsequences€of€his€guilty€pleas€as€enhancement€factors€for€future€punishments.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ׀Рø*ð#( ÐThe€State€responded€to€the€appellantððs€motion€on€December€23,€1993,€assertingÐ Ä,¼%* Ðthat€the€appellant€had€been€provided€an€evidentiary€hearing€on€his€post„convictionÐ .ˆ', Ðpetitions.€€The€record€indicates€that€on€January€13,€1994,€and€May€12,€1995,Ð \0T). Ðappointed€counsel€filed€memorandum€in€support€of€the€appellantððs€petitions€for€post„Ð (2 +0 Ðconviction€relief.€€The€record€also€reflects€that,€on€April€13,€1995,€the€Shelby€CountyÐ ô3ì,2 ÐCriminal€Court€heard€proceedings€on€the€appellantððs€petition€for€post„convictionÐ  Ðrelief€and€took€such€matter€under€advisement€until€May€19,€1995.€€On€December€7,Ð ÔÌ Ð1998,€the€Shelby€County€Criminal€Court€denied€the€appellantððs€Motion€to€ReconsiderÐ   ˜ Ðon€grounds€that€since€the€appellant€failed€to€appeal€the€Findings€of€Fact€andÐ l d ÐConclusions€of€Law€entered€by€the€trial€court€within€thirty€days€of€its€entry,€theÐ 80 ÐCriminal€Court€lost€jurisdiction€to€review€the€merits€of€its€order.€€On€December€14,Ð ü  Ð1998,€the€appellant€filed€a€notice€of€appeal€from€both€the€December€1998€order€andÐ ÐÈ  Ðthe€February€1990€order.Ð œ”  ÐÌÌà@*®àò òAnalysisó óˆÐ ø ÐÌà ` àThe€appellantððs€appeal€includes€both€the€December€7,€1998€order€and€theÐ ˜ ÐFebruary€12,€1990€order€of€the€Shelby€County€Criminal€Court.€€The€State€contendsÐ d\ Ðthat€the€appellant€has€waived€his€right€of€review€of€the€issues€presented€because€heÐ 0 ( Ðhas€failed€to€timely€file€his€notice€of€appeal€arising€from€the€post„conviction€courtððsÐ ü!ô Ðdenial€of€post„conviction€relief,€thus,€causing€the€trial€court€to€lose€jurisdiction€overÐ È#À  Ðhis€post„trial€motion.€€€We€acknowledge€that€the€initial€question€before€this€court€isÐ ”%Œ" Ðwhether€we€have€jurisdiction€€to€consider€the€appeal€of€the€December€1998€orderÐ `'X $ Ðdenying€the€appellantððs€Motion€to€Reconsider€and€whether€the€filing€of€this€post„Ð ,)$"& Ðjudgment€motion€tolled€the€thirty€day€time€period€in€which€to€file€a€notice€of€appeal.€Ð ø*ð#( ÐÌà ` àAgain,€the€post„conviction€court€entered€an€order€on€February€12,€1990,Ð .ˆ', Ðdenying€the€appellant€relief€on€all€nine€of€his€post„conviction€petitions.€€Rather€thanÐ \0T). Ðfiling€a€notice€of€appeal€to€this€court,€the€appellant,€on€March€14,€1990,€filed€with€theÐ (2 +0 Ðpost„conviction€court€a€ð ðMotion€to€Reconsider€and€for€Opportunity€to€Put€onÐ ô3ì,2 ÐTestimonial€Proof.ðð€€On€December€7,€1998,€the€post„conviction€court€entered€anÐ À5¸.4 Ðorder€dismissing€the€appellantððs€ð ðMotion€to€Reconsider.ðð€€On€December€14,€1998,Ð Œ7„06 Ðthe€appellant€filed€a€notice€of€appeal€to€this€court€from€both€the€December€1998Ð X9P28 Ðorder€and€the€February€1990€order.Ð  ÐÌà ` àThe€State€contends€that€the€appellant€has€waived€his€right€to€complain€ofÐ   ˜ Ðboth€the€December€1998€order€and€the€February€1990€order.€€Specifically,€the€StateÐ l d Ðcontends€that€the€post„conviction€court€correctly€found€that€it€was€without€jurisdictionÐ 80 Ðto€entertain€the€appellantððs€ð ðMotion€to€Reconsiderðð€once€the€courtððs€order€denyingÐ ü  Ðpost„conviction€relief€became€final.€€Moreover,€a€ð ðMotion€to€Reconsiderðð€does€not€tollÐ ÐÈ  Ðthe€running€of€the€thirty€day€appeal€period€in€a€post„conviction€proceeding.€Ð œ”  ÐAccordingly,€the€State€asserts€that€the€appellant€has€waived€his€right€to€appeal€theÐ h` Ðpost„conviction€courtððs€dismissal€of€his€petition€for€post„conviction€relief€entered€onÐ 4, ÐFebruary€12,€1990.€€€Ð ø ÐÌà ` àThe€appellant€responds€that€he€was€not€required€to€file€a€notice€of€appealÐ ˜ Ðuntil€thirty€days€after€the€post„conviction€court€disposed€of€his€post„judgment€motion.€Ð d\ ÐSpecifically,€the€appellant€asserts€that€his€timely€filed€ð ðMotion€to€Reconsiderðð€tolledÐ 0 ( Ðthe€thirty€day€appeal€period.€€In€support€of€his€contention,€the€appellant€relies€uponÐ ü!ô ÐTenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€59.02€and€59.04,€insisting€that€the€Post„Conviction€Procedure€Act€isÐ È#À  Ðgoverned€by€the€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure.€€Alternatively,€the€appellant€argues€thatÐ ”%Œ" Ðirrespective€of€whether€this€court€finds€the€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure€apply,€case€lawÐ `'X $ Ðdictates€that€he€was€not€required€to€file€a€notice€of€appeal€until€after€the€trial€courtÐ ,)$"& Ðdisposed€of€his€post„judgment€motion.€€€Ð ø*ð#( ÐÌà ` àOur€initial€inquiry€relative€to€the€determination€of€our€jurisdiction€over€thisÐ .ˆ', Ðproceeding€focuses€upon€whether€the€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure€apply€to€post„Ð \0T). Ðconviction€proceedings.€€The€appellate€courts€of€this€state€have€not€defined€whetherÐ (2 +0 Ðproceedings€initiated€under€the€Post„Conviction€Procedure€Act€are€purely€civil€orÐ ô3ì,2 Ðcriminal€in€nature.€€Invariably,€such€proceedings€have€been€characterized€as€quasi„Ð À5¸.4 Ðcivil,€quasi„criminal,€and€ð ðhybrid€affairs.ðð€€òòSeeóó€€òòWatkins€v.€Stateóó,€903€S.W.2d€302,Ð Œ7„06 Ð304€(Tenn.€1995).€€In€òòWatkins€v.€Stateóó,€our€supreme€court€observed,€citing€theÐ X9P28 ÐAmerican€Bar€Associationððs€Standards€for€Criminal€Justice,€2nd€Ed.:Ð  ÐÓÓà8 ` àPost„conviction€review€has€become€an€established€part€of€the€criminalÐ ÔÌ Ðprocess.€€In€formulating€a€rule€we€recognize€that€the€post„convictionÐ º ² Ðproceeding€is€procedurally€separate€and€apart€from€the€originalÐ   ˜ Ðcriminal€prosecution.€.€.€.€€It€seeks€not€to€convict,€but€to€set€aside€aÐ † ~ Ðconviction€which€is€void€or€voidable€because€of€the€abridgement€ofÐ l d Ðconstitutional€rights.€€The€base€root€of€the€proceedings€is€criminal.€€òòTheÐ R J Ðprocedure€by€which€a€criminal€conviction€may€be€set€aside€is€civil€inÐ 80 Ðnature,€therefore€it€is€tried€under€the€Rules€of€Civil€Procedureóó€and€lessÐ   Ðstringent€evidentiary€rules€apply.€€If€the€petitioner€is€unsuccessful€in€hisÐ ü  Ðapplication€his€criminal€status€is€retained.Ðêâ ` ü!` ü! ÐÌòòÓÓWatkinsóó,€903€S.W.2d€at€305€(emphasis€in€original).€€òòSee€alsoóó€€òòState€v.€Ronnie€CalvinÐ ¶®  Ðð ðPigðð€Stylesóó,€No.€03S01„9108„CR„67€(Tenn.€at€Knoxville,€Jan.€25,€1993).€Ð ‚z  ÐNotwithstanding,€this€general€statement€that€the€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure€should€beÐ NF Ðapplied,€the€court€noted€that€ð ð[t]he€procedural€characteristics€of€the€post„convictionÐ  Ðremedy€should€be€appropriate€to€the€purposes€of€the€remedy.ðð€€òòWatkinsóó,€903Ð æÞ ÐS.W.2d€at€305.€€Ð ²ª ÐÌà ` àIt€is€observed€€that€the€holding€of€òòWatkinsóó€was€expressly€limited€to€theÐ JB Ðprocedural€issue€of€the€tolling€of€the€statute€of€limitations.€€òòSeeóó€€òòWatkinsóó,€903Ð ! ÐS.W.2d€at€305„307.€€Indeed,€the€court€concluded€that€ð ð[f]or€the€procedural€purposesÐ â"Ú Ðòòrelevant€to€this€caseóó,€a€post„conviction€petition€should€be€considered€civil€in€nature.ðð€Ð ®$¦! ÐòòWatkinsóó,€€903€S.W.2d€at€305€(emphasis€added).€€Consequently,€the€courtÐ z&r# Ðdetermined€that,€for€purposes€of€tolling€the€statute€of€limitations,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÐ F(>!% Ð28„1„106€(tolling€statute€of€limitations€period€for€persons€of€unsound€mind)€isÐ * #' Ðapplicable€to€post„conviction€proceedings.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€By€expressly€limiting€their€holding€to€theÐ Þ+Ö$) Ðtolling€provisions€of€the€Act,€the€supreme€court€implicitly€upheld€their€previousÐ ª-¢&+ Ðholding€in€€òòState€v.€Scalesóó,€767€S.W.2d€157€(Tenn.€1989).€€In€òòScalesóó,€the€courtÐ v/n(- Ðconcluded€that,€for€purposes€of€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€4,€post„conviction€proceedings€areÐ B1:*/ Ðcriminal€in€nature€and€the€notice€of€appeal€may€be€waived€in€the€interest€of€justice.€Ð 3,1 ÐòòScalesóó,€767€S.W.2d€at€158.€€Thus,€there€is€no€definitive€answer€to€which€rules,€Ð  ÐÌCriminal€or€Civil,€are€to€apply.€Rather,€the€determination€of€which€rules€apply€underÐ   ˜ Ðthe€pre„1995€Post„Conviction€Procedure€Act€must€be€made€on€a€case„by„caseÐ l d Ðbasis.Ð 80 ÐÌà ` àPost„conviction€procedure€is€not€constitutionally€mandated€procedure;€rather,Ð ÐÈ  Ðit€exists€purely€as€a€creature€of€the€state€legislature.€€òòSeeóó€€òòJason€L.€Jennings€v.Ð œ”  ÐStateóó,€No.€01C01„9703„CR„00106€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Nashville,€Apr.€1,€1998),Ð h` Ðòòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€Nov.€9,€1998)€(citing€òòAbston€v.€Stateóó,€749€S.W.2dÐ 4, Ð487,€488€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988);€òòJames€Leon€Crowder€v.€Stateóó,€No.€01C01„9005„Ð ø ÐCR„00129€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Nashville,€Dec.€20,€1990)).€€In€this€regard,€allÐ ÌÄ Ðprocedural€aspects€should€be€first€determined€by€the€Act€itself.׃ ×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú5Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€In€support€of€thisÐ ˜ Ðproposition,€we€acknowledge€the€well„established€rule€of€statutory€constructionÐ d\ Ðproviding€that€a€specific€provision€relating€to€a€particular€subject€of€a€statute€controlsÐ 0 ( Ðover€a€general€provision€applicable€to€a€multitude€of€subjects.€€òòSeeóó€€òòCooper€v.Ð ü!ô ÐAlcohol€C.€of€City€of€Memphisóó,€745€S.W.2d€278,€280€(Tenn.€1988).€€òòSee€alsoóó€€òòStateÐ È#À  Ðv.€Nelsonóó,€577€S.W.2d€465,€466€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1978)€(the€specific€provisionÐ ”%Œ" Ðprevails€because€the€legislature€was€ð ðcarefully€directing€its€attention€to€the€particularÐ `'X $ Ðsubject€matterðð).€€Likewise,€the€specific€mandates€of€a€statutory€provision€shall€takeÐ ,)$"& Ðprecedence€over€the€general€provisions€of€the€rules€of€procedure.€€òòSeeóó€€òòCooperóó,€745Ð ø*ð#( ÐS.W.2d€at€280.€€€Thus,€the€Post„Conviction€Procedure€Act€should€be€construedÐ Ä,¼%* Ðâ âwithin€its€own€terms€supplemented€by€the€Rules€of€Civil€and€Criminal€ProcedureÐ .ˆ', Ðwhere€expressly€authorized€to€do€so.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú6Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€òòSeeóó€€òòCharles€A.€Griffin€v.€Stateóó,€No.€01C01„Ð  Ðâ â9307„CC„00225€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Nashville,€Dec.€23,€1993),€òòconcurring€in€resultsÐ ÔÌ Ðonlyóó,€(Tenn.€Mar.€28,€1994)€(ð ðsuits€brought€pursuant€to€the€Post„ConvictionÐ   ˜ ÐProcedure€Act€are€governed€by€the€Act„„such€actions€are€not€governed€by€either€theÐ l d ÐTennessee€Rules€of€Criminal€Procedure€or€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€CivilÐ 80 ÐProcedure);€€òòRussell€Davis€v.€Stateóó,€No.€02C01„9307„CR„00132€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð ü  Ðat€Jackson,€Mar.€23,€1993),€òòaffððd€byóó,€912€S.W.2d€689€(Tenn.€1995).€€€€Ð ÐÈ  ÐÌà ` àA€review€of€the€Act€leads€us€to€the€conclusion€that€a€motion€to€reconsider€isÐ h` Ðnot€expressly€authorized€in€a€post„conviction€proceeding.€€òòSeeóó€€òòTony€Craig€WoodsÐ 4, Ðv.€Stateóó,€No.€01C01„9606„CR„00238€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Nashville,€Sept.€30,Ð ø Ð1997),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€Jun.€29,€1998)€(citing€€òòState€v.€Burrowóó,€769Ð ÌÄ ÐS.W.2d€510,€511€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1989);€òòState€v.€Ryanóó,€756€S.W.2d€284,€285€n.€2Ð ˜ Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1988)).€€The€Act€was€designedÐ d\ Ðto€achieve€finality€through€one€post„conviction€hearing€in€which€all€grounds€forÐ 0 ( Ðchallenging€the€validity€of€a€conviction€would€be€considered,€thereby€€eliminatingÐ ü!ô Ðsubsequent€petitions€for€relief€in€state€and€federal€courts.€€òòSeeóó€€G.€Gray,Ð È#À  ÐMemorandum€to€Tennessee€Judicial€Council€€Post€Conviction€Procedure€Act€(Oct.Ð ”%Œ" Ð22,€1970)€(Tenn.€State€Archives).€€This€purpose€would€be€frustrated€if€this€courtÐ `'X $ Ðwere€to€interpret€the€Act€to€include€a€list€of€non„exhaustible€post„judgment€motions.€Ð ,)$"& ÐIndeed,€under€the€Post„Conviction€Procedure€Act,€ð ð[t]he€order€granting€or€denyingÐ ø*ð#( Ðrelief€.€.€.€òòshall€be€deemed€a€final€judgmentóó,€and€an€appeal€may€be€taken€to€the€courtÐ Ä,¼%* Ðof€criminal€appeals€in€the€manner€prescribed€by€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€AppellateÐ .ˆ', ÐProcedure.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð40„30„122€[òòrepealedóó€1995]€(emphasis€added).€Ð \0T). ÐOnce€a€judgment€is€final,€the€trial€court€generally€loses€jurisdiction€to€amend€it.€Ð  ÐòòState€v.€Lockóó,€839€S.W.2d€436,€440€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992)€(citing€€òòState€v.€Mooreóó,Ð ÔÌ Ð814€S.W.2d€381€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991);€òòRay€v.€Stateóó,€576€S.W.2d€598,€602€Ð   ˜ ÐÌ(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1978)).€€Accordingly,€the€post„conviction€court€lost€jurisdictionÐ 80 Ðover€the€proceeding€when€it€entered€its€order€denying€relief€on€February€12,€1990.€€Ð ü  ÐÌà ` àAdditionally,€the€Rules€of€Appellate€Procedure€do€not€permit€an€appeal€as€ofÐ œ”  Ðright€from€an€order€denying€a€motion€to€reconsider.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€3(b)€providesÐ h` Ðthat:€Ð 4, ÐÓÓà8 ` àan€appeal€as€of€right€by€a€defendant€lies€from€any€judgment€ofÐ ø Ðconviction€entered€by€a€trial€court€from€which€an€appeal€lies€to€theÐ æÞ ÐSupreme€Court€or€Court€of€Criminal€Appeals:€(1)€on€a€plea€of€notÐ ÌÄ Ðguilty;€and€(2)€on€a€plea€of€guilty€or€nolo€contendere,€if€the€defendantÐ ²ª Ðentered€into€a€plea€agreement€but€explicitly€reserved€with€the€consentÐ ˜ Ðof€the€state€and€the€trial€court€the€right€to€appeal€a€certified€question€ofÐ ~v Ðlaw€dispositive€of€the€action,€or€if€the€defendant€seeks€review€of€hisÐ d\ Ðsentence€and€there€was€no€plea€agreement€€concerning€his€sentence,Ð JB Ðor€if€the€issues€presented€for€review€were€not€waived€as€a€matter€ofÐ 0 ( Ðlaw€by€the€plea€of€guilty€or€nolo€contendere€and€if€such€issues€areÐ ! Ðapparent€from€the€record€of€the€proceedings€already€had.€€TheÐ ü!ô Ðdefendant€may€also€appeal€as€of€right€from€an€order€denying€orÐ â"Ú Ðrevoking€probation,€and€from€a€final€judgment€in€a€criminal€contempt,Ð È#À  Ðhabeas€corpus,€extradition,€or€post„conviction€proceeding.€€Ð®$¦!` ü!` ü! ÐÌÓÓAccordingly,€this€court€does€not€have€jurisdiction€to€consider€the€appellantððs€ð ðMotionÐ z&r# Ðto€Reconsider.ðð€€We€conclude€that€the€appeal€of€the€December€1998€order€of€theÐ F(>!% Ðpost„conviction€court€is€not€properly€before€this€court.Ð * #' ÐÌà ` àNotwithstanding€this€conclusion,€we€must€also€determine€the€propriety€of€theÐ ª-¢&+ Ðappellantððs€appeal€of€the€post„conviction€courtððs€order€of€February€12,€1990.€€AnÐ v/n(- Ðappeal€as€of€right€is€initiated€by€the€filing€of€a€notice€of€appeal,€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€3(e),Ð B1:*/ Ðwithin€thirty€days€of€the€entry€of€the€judgment€being€appealed.€€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.Ð 3,1 Ð4(a).€€For€purposes€of€notice€of€appeal€requirements,€the€Post„Conviction€ProcedureÐ Ú4Ò-3 ÐAct€has€been€construed€as€being€criminal€in€nature.€€òòSeeóó€€òòScalesóó,€767€S.W.2d€atÐ ¦6ž/5 Ð158.€€Thus,€the€notice€of€appeal€document€is€not€jurisdictional€and€the€filing€of€suchÐ r8j17 Ðdocument€may€be€waived€in€the€interest€of€justice.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€4(a);€€òòScalesóó,Ð >:639 Ð767€S.W.2d€at€158.€€The€thirty€day€period€shall€not€be€tolled€but€for€the€timely€filingÐ  Ðof€a€(1)€motion€for€judgment€of€acquittal;€(2)€motion€for€new€trial;€(3)€motion€for€arrestÐ ÔÌ Ðof€judgment;€or€(4)€motion€for€a€suspended€sentence.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€4(c).€€€If€oneÐ   ˜ Ðof€the€enumerated€motions€is€filed,€the€thirty€days€runs€from€the€entry€of€the€orderÐ l d Ðdetermining€such€motion€or€motions.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€4(c).€€The€Post„ConvictionÐ 80 ÐProcedure€Act,€by€its€very€nature€and€purpose,€does€not€contemplate€the€filing€ofÐ ü  Ðany€of€the€motions€enumerated€in€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€4(c).€€Thus,€no€post„judgmentÐ ÐÈ  Ðmotions€are€permitted€to€suspend€the€running€of€the€appeal€time€from€the€entry€ofÐ œ”  Ðthe€judgment€in€a€post„conviction€proceeding.€€òòSeeóó€€òòLockóó,€839€S.W.2d€at€440Ð h` Ð(citations€omitted).€€Indeed,€regarding€a€motion€to€reconsider,€this€court€hasÐ 4, Ðspecifically€noted€that€ð ðthere€is€no€provision€in€the€Tennessee€Rules€of€CriminalÐ ø ÐProcedure€for€a€ððpetition€to€reconsiderðð.€.€.€.ðð€€òòId.óó€(citing€òòState€v.€Ryanóó,€756€S.W.2d€atÐ ÌÄ Ð285€n.2).€Ð ˜ ÐÌà ` àNotwithstanding€our€conclusion,€even€if€the€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure€appliedÐ 0 ( Ðas€argued€by€the€appellant;€the€Motion€to€Reconsider€filed€in€the€present€€caseÐ ü!ô Ðwould€not€toll€the€thirty€day€filing€period.€€The€only€motions€contemplated€under€theÐ È#À  ÐRules€of€Civil€Procedure€for€extending€the€time€for€taking€steps€for€appellateÐ ”%Œ" Ðproceedings€are€a€motion€for€directed€verdict,€a€motion€to€make€additional€findingsÐ `'X $ Ðof€fact,€a€motion€to€assess€costs,€a€motion€for€new€trial,€and€a€motion€to€amend€theÐ ,)$"& Ðjudgment.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú7Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€òòSeeóó€€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€Pro.€59.01€(1990).€€In€essence,€the€purpose€of€theseÐ ø*ð#( Ðmotions€is€to€prevent€unnecessary€appeals€by€giving€the€trial€court€an€opportunity€toÐ Ä,¼%* Ðcorrect€errors€which€occurred€before€the€entry€of€judgment.€€òòSeeóó€€òòMacLean€andÐ .ˆ', ÐMacLean,€Tennessee€Practice,€Rules€of€Civil€Procedureóó,€v.€4€ðð€59.2€(1989).€€€Ð \0T). ÐÌà ` àIn€reviewing€the€motion,€this€court€must€consider€the€substance€of€the€motionÐ ô3ì,2 Ðin€determining€whether€it€is€in€fact€one€of€the€specified€post„trial€motions€which€tollÐ À5¸.4 Ðcommencement€of€the€time€period.€€òòSeeóó€€òòTennessee€Farmers€Mut.€Ins.€Co.€v.Ð  ÐFarmeróó,€970€S.W.2d€453,€455€(Tenn.€1998);€òòsee€alsoóó€€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.€8.05€(noÐ ÔÌ Ðtechnical€forms€of€pleading€or€motions€are€required).€€€Applying€this€rule,€we€canÐ   ˜ Ðascertain€that€the€appellantððs€ð ðMotion€to€Reconsiderðð€is,€in€substance,€a€motion€forÐ l d Ðan€evidentiary€hearing.€€Clearly,€this€motion€is€not€encompassed€by€Tenn.€R.€Civ.€P.Ð 80 Ð59.01€and,€therefore,€does€not€toll€the€thirty€day€time€period.€€Thus,€even€applyingÐ ü  Ðthe€Rules€of€Civil€Procedure,€the€motion€does€not€toll€the€thirty€day€time€period.Ð ÐÈ  ÐÌà ` àAlthough€we€have€concluded€that€the€appellantððs€Motion€to€Reconsider€didÐ h` Ðnot€toll€the€thirty€day€time€period,€we€must€still€determine€whether€the€appellantððsÐ 4, Ðnotice€of€appeal€of€the€February€1990€order€was€timely€filed.€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€4(a)Ð ø Ðprovides€that€a€notice€of€appeal€shall€be€filed€with€and€received€by€the€clerk€of€theÐ ÌÄ Ðtrial€court€within€thirty€days€after€the€date€of€entry€of€the€judgment€appealed€from.€Ð ˜ ÐThus,€the€appellantððs€filing€of€his€notice€of€appeal€on€December€14,€1998,€was€wellÐ d\ Ðoutside€the€thirty€day€time€period.€€Notwithstanding,€the€rules€also€provide€that€ð ðin€allÐ 0 ( Ðcriminal€cases€ððthe€notice€of€appealðð€document€is€not€jurisdictional,€and€the€filing€ofÐ ü!ô Ðsuch€document€may€be€waived€in€the€interest€of€justice.ðððð€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€4(a);€òòseeÐ È#À  Ðalsoóó€€òòScalesóó,€767€S.W.2d€at€158€(holding€that€for€purposes€of€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€4(a),Ð ”%Œ" Ðpost„conviction€proceedings€are€criminal€in€nature).€Ð `'X $ ÐÌà ` àIn€determining€whether€the€thirty€day€time€limit€for€filing€a€notice€of€appealÐ ø*ð#( Ðshould€be€waived€in€the€instant€case,€we€note€that€the€notice€of€appeal€was€filedÐ Ä,¼%* Ðalmost€nine€years€after€the€post„conviction€courtððs€denial€of€post„conviction€relief.€€Ð .ˆ', ÐThe€conviction€giving€rise€to€the€post„conviction€claim€occurred€approximatelyÐ \0T). Ðsixteen€years€prior€to€the€filing€of€this€notice.€€The€appellant€was€represented€byÐ (2 +0 Ðcounsel€over€this€time€span€and€failed€to€comply€with€the€applicable€rules€ofÐ ô3ì,2 Ðprocedure,€in€addition€to€failing€to€follow€the€provisions€of€the€Post„ConvictionÐ À5¸.4 ÐProcedure€Act.€€€Also,€we€note€that€the€appellant€has€failed€to€provide€this€court€withÐ Œ7„06 Ðany€reason€as€to€why€justice€requires€that€the€timely€notice€requirement€should€beÐ X9P28 Ðwaived.€€Ð  ÐÌà ` àAnother€important€consideration€in€support€of€waiver€is€the€policyÐ   ˜ Ðconsideration€that€ð ðthere€must€be€a€finality€to€all€litigation,€criminal€as€well€as€civil.ðð€Ð l d ÐòòHouse€v.€Stateóó,€911€S.W.2d€705,€713€(Tenn.€1995),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€517€U.S.€1193,Ð 80 Ð116€S.Ct.€1685€(1996)€(citations€omitted).€€A€defendant€in€a€criminal€prosecutionÐ ü  Ðshould€be€bound€by€the€judgment€entered€just€as€a€party€to€a€civil€suit.€€òòId.óó€€€SuchÐ ÐÈ  Ðð ð[p]erpetual€disrespect€for€the€finality€of€convictions€disparages€the€entire€criminalÐ œ”  Ðjustice€system,ðð€by€burdening€its€judicial€resources€and€diminishing€the€reliability€ofÐ h` Ðreview€due€to€the€passage€of€time.€€òòSeeóó€€òòHouseóó,€911€S.W.2d€at€713€(citingÐ 4, ÐòòMcClesky€v.€Zantóó,€499€U.S.€467,€493,€111€S.Ct.€1454,€1469€(1991)).€€Indeed,€theÐ ø ÐUnited€States€Supreme€Court€characterized€the€finality€of€judgments€as€ð ð[one]€of€theÐ ÌÄ Ðlawððs€very€objects.ðð€€òòHouseóó,€911€S.W.2d€at€713€(quoting€òòMcCleskyóó,€499€U.S.€at€491,Ð ˜ Ð111€S.Ct.€at€1468)).€Thus,€after€reviewing€the€issues,€briefs,€and€the€record€beforeÐ d\ Ðthis€court,€we€conclude€that€justice€does€not€require€us€to€waive€the€thirty€day€filingÐ 0 ( Ðrequirement€of€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€4(a).׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú8Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòState€v.€Cleotha€Nashóó,€No.€02C01„Ð ü!ô Ð9701„CC„0026€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Jackson,€Feb.€18,€1998),€òòperm.€to€appealÐ È#À  Ðdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€Oct.€12,€1998).€€Ð ”%Œ" ÐÌà ` àFollowing€a€review€of€the€record€before€this€court,€we€conclude€that€theÐ ,)$"& Ðappellant€has€waived€his€right€to€appeal€the€lower€courtððs€denial€of€his€petition€forÐ ø*ð#( Ðpost„conviction€relief.€€Additionally,€we€find€that€the€appellantððs€appeal€of€the€lowerÐ Ä,¼%* Ðcourtððs€denial€of€his€Motion€to€Reconsider€is€not€properly€before€this€court.€€Ð .ˆ', Їà ` àIt€is,€therefore,€ORDERED,€that€the€appellantððs€appeal€be€dismissed.Ð  ÐÌÌÓÓÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à____________________________________Ð 80 Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JudgeÐ   ÐÌÌÌÌCONCUR:Ð œ”  ÐÌÌÌÌÌ_________________________________________Ð ø ÐJOE€G.€RILEY,€JudgeÐ æÞ ÐÌÌÌÌ_________________________________________Ð d\ ÐTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€Judge