ÿWPCx# ÍW¨ÜÒŠ‚.àŠ e¶Úf² _Hx+–سz°0NàêLÃÌÁN¢¾dêqA«g™ŽmÝ7…âs·#tDn¶Ô<™©ØRA­©œûU™Pc× ê¢BÅω†éÿU“›ÃlÁ%.uÄÞè«lÊ7=¦´¼íÓ)ó¯$”×± ¾èL |/Wx`dF|”þW´¯ÖV‹Ñai™#+}Z#}]/tF¯‘v“·wš1ÕàXÿŽ Ö;N=Žà~ÍùÃÖœ$„Ï*ËúS{¿ ?$±|õ”ZÜCºRôx®HS^ïhqÑaõ7ÄÔ?.‚Ù&2Æ].ã)¬¿ŽI±Œ,Îà85‹y÷í_›ÁÌÇ ƒ¤>˜¤ø‡,œ#ô†WiCÐ~Jþ¢Ü?·[UÕíþ‹´ø ùÞ-þÚFv‘à›ÁuíòŸË’À[ºê¼k¾ù* ¶°p2ðØci©U¯x:¡ÌO’¸bus–…>YhÓ $« ³ø¤F³èÁ¥P(žîŸåãÙ ‹…À¦þ<Š—ã†ÚI$y¤ÐÄY~ ·(zmè}Ë=êã·ÅH)‚g( ¢µ"OýùƒsÁ‰†ÍÑh7ˆÕr³UBÚ>íŒ9ÄÍÛ¶"ÁõªŸ4S×úÔo U:À %ú 0Üw@Ü40?9G 0 € 0D æä”Êÿ^^^^^ ]¹iÒ"!gô!ô!ô!ô!ô!ô!ô!ô!ô!ô! B[#, øð AZ‹"Arial RegularX(´`$¡¡Ñ°ÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€‰GXXdðXXdð7ÑÑ  Ñ /0E12CeDUEUFUGHEäzz!µ¶·¸¹º»¼½¾¿À3|xH /Ò°ÒÔ€ôå”ôXXÔÝ ƒ üÝÿÝà ` àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€appellant€raises€only€one€issue€on€appeal,€whether€the€evidence€preponderatesÐ  Ðagainst€the€trial€court's€finding€that€the€appellant€was€not€denied€effective€assistance€of€counsel.ÏThis€issue€is€waived€because€it€does€not€conform€to€Rule€27(a)(4),€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€€òòHarvey€v.Ð ˜ ÐStateóó,€749€S.W.2d€478,€479€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1988);Ð ` X Ðòòaccordóó€€òòTortorich€v.€Ericksonóó,€675€S.W.2d€190,€191€(Tenn.€App.),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,Ð (  Ð(Tenn.1984);€€òòState€v.€Lewisóó,€€No.€2€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Jackson,€Dec.€23,€1987),€òòperm.€toÐ ð è Ðappeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1988)€(Jones,€J.,€concurring);€€òòsee€alsoóó€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€27(a)(6„7).€€Ð ¸ ° Ð"T.R.A.P.€does€not€contemplate€that€an€appellant€may€submit€one€blanket€issue€as€to€theÏcorrectness€of€a€judgment€and€thereby€open€the€door€to€argument€upon€various€issues€whichÏmight€affect€the€correctness€of€the€judgment."€€òòLewisóó,€No.€2€(quoting€òòLeeson€v.€Chernauóó,€734Ð   ÐS.W.2d€634,€637€(Tenn.€App.),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1987)).€€Therefore,€as€the€appellant's€issue€ofÐ ØÐ  Ðineffectiveness€is€too€general€in€scope€under€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€27(a)(4),€we€conclude€that€thisÏissue€has€been€waived.€€However,€we€elect€to€review€the€ineffectiveness€claim€as€to€the€issuesÏspecifically€articulated€in€his€argument.(Ð(30˜$¤¤Ý ƒ`!ÝÑ°ÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€L‰XXdædæ7ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ýà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó ÜÒ°ÒÔ€ôå”ôXXÔÝ ƒ üÝÿÝà ` àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€appellant€was€initially€charged€with€three€counts€of€attempt€to€commit€first€degreeÐ  Ðmurder,€two€counts€of€aggravated€assault,€two€counts€of€reckless€endangerment,€and€one€countÏof€conspiracy€to€commit€first€degree€murder.€€The€proof€introduced€at€the€appellant's€trial€revealedÏthat,€on€August€16,€1991,€the€appellant€and€Otis€Stocking€drove€by€a€party€at€the€W.O.W.€BuildingÏin€Brownsville,€Tennessee.€€They€were€advised€that€Anthony€Rogers€was€looking€for€them.€€TheÏtwo€men€then€proceeded€to€the€apartment€of€Stocking's€sister,€where€they€obtained€two€pistolsÏand€changed€automobiles.€€Along€with€two€other€persons,€the€appellant€and€Stocking€returned€toÏthe€W.O.W.€building.€€The€appellant€exited€the€vehicle€and€began€walking€toward€a€nearby€footballÏfield.€€Stocking,€who€remained€in€the€vehicle,€spotted€Anthony€Rogers€and€began€firing€hisÏweapon.€€Two€innocent€bystanders€were€injured€as€a€result€of€this€incident.€€The€appellant€laterÏconceded€his€involvement€in€the€incident.€€òòSeeóó€€òòState€v.€Brownóó,€No.€02C01„9303„CC„00036Ð ØÐ  Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Jackson,€Dec.€1,€1993). ŠÒ°ÒÔ€ôå”ôXXÔÝ ƒ üÝÿÝà ` àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€òòStricklandóó€standard€has€been€applied€to€the€right€of€counsel€under€Article€I,€SectionÐ  ÐIX€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution.€€òòState€v.€Melsonóó,€772€S.W.2d€417,€419€n.2€(Tenn.),€òòcert.€deniedóó,Ð ÐÈ Ð493€U.S.€874,€110€S.Ct.€211€(1989). õÒ°ÒÔ€ôå”ôXXÔÝ ƒ üÝÿÝà ` àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝOn€cross„examination,€the€appellant€indicated€that€these€witnesses€consisted€of€hisÐ  Ðsister€and€his€co„defendants. Ý ƒ üÝ$Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€appellant€raises€only€one€issue€on€appeal,€whether€the€evidenceÐ  Ðpreponderates€against€the€trial€court's€finding€that€the€appellant€was€not€deniedÏeffective€assistance€of€counsel.€This€issue€is€waived€because€it€does€not€conform€toÏRule€27(a)(4),€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€€òòHarvey€v.€Stateóó,€749€S.W.2d€478,€479€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð Ø Ð ÐApp.€1987),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1988);€òòaccordóó€€òòTortorich€v.€Ericksonóó,€675Ð È À ÐS.W.2d€190,€191€(Tenn.€App.),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.1984);€€òòState€v.€Lewisóó,€Ð ¸ ° ÐNo.€2€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Jackson,€Dec.€23,€1987),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.Ð ¨   Ð1988)€(Jones,€J.,€concurring);€€òòsee€alsoóó€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€27(a)(6„7).€€€"T.R.A.P.€doesÐ ˜  Ðnot€contemplate€that€an€appellant€may€submit€one€blanket€issue€as€to€the€correctnessÏof€a€judgment€and€thereby€open€the€door€to€argument€upon€various€issues€which€mightÏaffect€the€correctness€of€the€judgment."€€òòLewisóó,€No.€2€(quoting€òòLeeson€v.€Chernauóó,€734Ð h`  ÐS.W.2d€634,€637€(Tenn.€App.),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1987)).€€Therefore,€as€theÐ XP  Ðappellant's€issue€of€ineffectiveness€is€too€general€in€scope€under€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.Ï27(a)(4),€we€conclude€that€this€issue€has€been€waived.€€However,€we€elect€to€review€theÏineffectiveness€claim€as€to€the€issues€specifically€articulated€in€his€argument. ¯Ý ƒ üÝ$Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€appellant€was€initially€charged€with€three€counts€of€attempt€to€commit€firstÐ  Ðdegree€murder,€two€counts€of€aggravated€assault,€two€counts€of€recklessÏendangerment,€and€one€count€of€conspiracy€to€commit€first€degree€murder.€€The€proofÏintroduced€at€the€appellant's€trial€revealed€that,€on€August€16,€1991,€the€appellant€andÏOtis€Stocking€drove€by€a€party€at€the€W.O.W.€Building€in€Brownsville,€Tennessee.€€TheyÏwere€advised€that€Anthony€Rogers€was€looking€for€them.€€The€two€men€then€proceededÏto€the€apartment€of€Stocking's€sister,€where€they€obtained€two€pistols€and€changedÏautomobiles.€€Along€with€two€other€persons,€the€appellant€and€Stocking€returned€to€theÏW.O.W.€building.€€The€appellant€exited€the€vehicle€and€began€walking€toward€a€nearbyÏfootball€field.€€Stocking,€who€remained€in€the€vehicle,€spotted€Anthony€Rogers€andÏbegan€firing€his€weapon.€€Two€innocent€bystanders€were€injured€as€a€result€of€thisÏincident.€€The€appellant€later€conceded€his€involvement€in€the€incident.€€òòSeeóó€€òòState€v.Ð XP  ÐBrownóó,€No.€02C01„9303„CC„00036€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Jackson,€Dec.€1,€1993). ÈÝ ƒ üÝ$Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝOn€cross„examination,€the€appellant€indicated€that€these€witnesses€consisted€ofÐ  Ðhis€sister€and€his€co„defendants. ]Ý ƒ üÝ$Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€òòStricklandóó€standard€has€been€applied€to€the€right€of€counsel€under€Article€I,Ð  ÐSection€IX€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution.€€òòState€v.€Melsonóó,€772€S.W.2d€417,€419€n.2Ð øð Ð(Tenn.),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€493€U.S.€874,€110€S.Ct.€211€(1989). dÝ ƒ`!ÝÑ°ÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€L‰XXdædÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝñCñ›ñCññCñ›ñCñò òà@˜ ˜ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ  Ðà@””(àAT€JACKSONˆÌà@22#àOCTOBER€SESSION,€1996ˆÌó óÌÌÌÌò òIVORY€BROWNó ó,à  àà h àà À à)Ð d \ Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àNo.€02C01„9505„CC„00137Ð PH Ðà ` àAppellantà  àà h àà À à)Ð 6.  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àHAYWOOD€COUNTYÐ   Ðvs.à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)Ð ú  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  àHon.€Dick€Jerman,€Jr.,€JudgeÐ èà  Ðò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEó ó,à h àà À à)Ð ÎÆ  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à)à  à(Post„Conviction)Ð º²  Ðà ` àAppelleeà  àà h àà À à)Ð  ˜  ÐÌÌÌòòFor€the€Appellantóó:à  àà h àà À àà  àòòFor€the€Appelleeóó:Ð 80 ÐÌTom€W.€Criderà  àà h àà À àà  àCharles€W.€BursonÐ ü ÐDistrict€Public€Defenderà h àà À àà  àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÐ êâ Ðà ` àÌPeriann€S.€Houghtonà h àà À àà  àSarah€M.€BranchÐ ¶® ÐAsst.€Public€Defenderà h àà À àà  àAssistant€Attorney€Generalà Ð àÐ œ” Ð107€S.€Court€Squareà h àà À àà  àCriminal€Justice€DivisionÐ ‚z ÐTrenton,€TN€€38282à h àà À àà  àà p à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÐ h` Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àNashville,€TN€37243„0493à x àà Ð àÐ N F Ðà ` àà ¸ àÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àClayburn€L.€PeeplesÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à109€East€First€StreetÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àTrenton,€TN€€38382ÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ 0*(#' ÐÌAFFIRMEDÌÌÌÌò òDavid€G.€Hayesó óÐ ”/Œ(- ÐJudgeÐ  €0x). ÐÓÓà@qq*àòòò òOPINIONóóó óˆÐ  ÐÌà ` àThe€appellant,€Ivory€Brown,€appeals€the€Haywood€County€Circuit€Court'sÏorder€denying€his€petition€for€post„conviction€relief.€€In€this€appeal,€the€appellantÏcontends€that€he€was€denied€his€constitutional€right€to€the€effective€assistance€ofÏcounsel.ñ2ñ׃×ñ2ññ2ñ׃×ñ2ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€In€his€brief,€the€appellant€alleges€that€his€trial€counsel€was€ineffectiveÐ h`  Ðbased€upon€counsel's:€ÌÓÓà8 ` à(A)€failure€to€apprise€the€appellant€of€the€charges€against€him;Ð ` Ð ` Ð  ÐÌà8 ` à(B)€failure€to€contact€"three€to€four"€witnesses€named€by€theÏappellant;Ð ` Ð ` Ð  ÐÌà8 ` à(C)€failure€to€request€a€special€jury€instruction€on€missingÏwitnesses;€andÐ ` Ð ` Ð  ÐÌà8 ` à(D)€failure€to€adequately€prepare€for€trial.Ð ` Ð ` Ð  ÐÓÓÌà ` àAfter€a€review€of€the€record€and€the€brief€of€both€parties,€we€affirm€theÏorder€of€the€trial€court€denying€post„conviction€relief.ÌÌÌà@``&àò òI.€€Backgroundó óˆÐ ø%ð! ÐÌà ` àOn€September€15,€1992,€a€jury€returned€a€verdict€finding€the€appellantÏguilty€of€the€offenses€of€conspiracy€to€commit€murder€in€the€first€degree€and€two€œñDñÌÐ x-p&) ЇÌñDñcounts›€of€reckless€endangerment.ñ2ñ׃ ×ñ2ññ2ñ׃×ñ2ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Subsequently,€the€trial€court€imposedÐ èà Ðconcurrent€sentences€of€twenty„two€years€and€six€months€for€the€conspiracyÏconviction€and€two€years€for€each€reckless€endangerment€conviction.€€OnÏappeal,€this€court€affirmed€the€appellant's€convictions€but€modified€his€sentenceÏfor€conspiracy€to€twenty€years.€€òòSeeóó€€òòState€v.€Brownóó,€No.€02C01„9303„CC„00036Ð h`  Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Jackson,€Dec.€1,€1993).€€€On€August€11,€1994,€the€appellantÏfiled€a€petition€for€post„conviction€relief€alleging€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel.€ÏA€hearing€was€held€on€March€6,€1995.€€On€March€29,€1995,€the€trial€courtÏdismissed€the€petition.ÌÌà ` àAt€the€post„conviction€hearing,€the€appellant€testified€that€John€Bond,€whoÏis€now€deceased,€represented€him€at€his€September€1992€trial.€€The€appellantÏstated€that€Bond€did€not€inform€him€of€the€pending€charges.€€He€furtherÏcomplained€that€Bond€only€discussed€the€charges€with€him€"once€before€theÏtrial,"€despite€the€appellant's€attempts€to€arrange€further€meetings.€€He€addedÏthat€there€were€no€arrangements€"before€the€case€to€get€our€proper€evidenceÏand€witnesses€together."€€In€fact,€the€appellant€testified€that€he€provided€BondÏwith€the€names€of€"three€to€four"€witnesses,€but€Bond€never€contacted€theseÏpeople.ñ2ñ׃ ð ×ñ2ññ2ñ׃ð ×ñ2ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€appellant€also€related€his€dissatisfaction€with€his€trial€counsel'sÐ ¨* #& Ðfailure€to€file€various€motions,€failure€to€make€timely€and€necessary€objections,Ð ˆ,€%( Ðfailure€to€move€for€an€acquittal,€and€failure€to€ask€for€the€missing€witness€ruleÏconcerning€Anthony€Rogers.ÌÌà ` àOn€cross„examination,€the€appellant€admitted€that€he€was€aware€of€theÏpunishment€for€attempted€murder€and€that€the€lesser€offenses€"didn't€carry€asÏmuch€time."€€Specifically,€his€trial€counsel€had€relayed€the€State's€offer€of€fifteenÏyears,€the€minimum€sentence€available€for€attempted€murder,€in€exchange€for€aÏguilty€plea.€€The€appellant€also€conceded€that€he€had€informed€trial€counsel€thatÏhe€intended€to€proceed€to€trial.€€ÌÌà ` àEdward€Hardister,€the€prosecutor€at€the€appellant's€trial,€testified€that,€priorÏto€trial,€the€appellant's€trial€counsel,€Bond,€contacted€him€several€times€toÏdiscuss€the€case.€€Hardister€confirmed€that€the€State€was€unable€to€serveÏAnthony€Rogers,€the€intended€victim,€with€a€subpoena.€€This€concluded€the€proofÏat€the€post„conviction€hearing.ÌÌà ` àIn€denying€the€appellant's€petition,€the€court€found€that€his€counselÏadequately€advised€the€appellant€of€the€charges€against€him,€that€trial€counselÏcommunicated€the€State's€offer€of€fifteen€years€to€him,€and€that€the€appellantÏunderstood€the€time€he€could€receive€on€the€pending€charges.€€The€court€notedÏthat€trial€counsel€properly€and€adequately€investigated€and€prepared€the€defenseÏfor€the€appellant.€€Furthermore,€trial€counsel€made€all€necessary€objections€in€aÏtimely€manner.€€Accordingly,€the€court€concluded€that€"the€advice€given€and€theÏservices€rendered€[by€John€Bond]€were€within€the€range€of€competencyÏdemanded€of€attorneys€in€criminal€cases.€€And€that€the€defendant€was€notÏdenied€effective€assistance€of€counsel.€.€.€."Ì€€€ÌÐ ¨9 26 Ðà@ïï'àò òII.€€Analysisó óˆÐ  Ðà ` àÌà ` àPost„conviction€relief€is€not€a€forum€in€which€to€relitigate€claims€of€errorÏraised€and€determined€previously€by€a€court€of€competent€jurisdiction.€€òòSwansonÐ ¨   Ðv.€Stateóó,€749€S.W.2d€731,€833€(Tenn.€1988);€òòState€v.€McClintockóó,€732€S.W.2dÐ ˆ€ Ð268,€272€(Tenn.€1987).€€Accordingly,€we€elect€not€to€address€the€appellant'sÏallegation€of€ineffectiveness€due€to€failure€to€request€a€missing€witnessÏinstruction€as€it€has€been€previously€determined€by€this€court€on€direct€appeal.€ÏòòSeeóó€€òòBrownóó,€No.€02C01„9303„CC„00036.€€Thus,€our€review€is€limited€to€theÐ  Ðallegations€of€deficient€performance€based€upon€trial€counsel's€failure€to€adviseÏthe€appellant€of€the€pending€charges,€failure€to€contact€alleged€"alibi"€witnesses,Ïand€failure€to€adequately€prepare€for€trial.€€€€€ÌÌà ` àIn€determining€whether€the€appellant€received€effective€assistance€ofÏcounsel€as€guaranteed€by€the€Sixth€Amendment€of€the€United€StatesÏConstitution€and€Art.€I,€Sec.€IX€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution,€this€court€mustÏlook€to€whether€the€performance€of€trial€counsel€was€within€the€range€ofÏcompetence€demanded€of€attorneys€in€criminal€cases.€€òòBaxter€v.€Roseóó,€523Ð è&à" ÐS.W.2d€930,€936€(Tenn.€1975).€€To€reverse€a€conviction€on€these€grounds,€theÏappellant€must€show,€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence,€òòTaylor€v.€Stateóó,€875Ð ¨* #& ÐS.W.2d€684,€686€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1994),Ð ˆ,€%( Ðthat€counsel's€representation€was€deficient€and€that€there€was€prejudice€resultingÏfrom€that€deficiency.ñ2ñ׃ ×ñ2ññ2ñ׃×ñ2ñÝ ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú4Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€òòStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466€U.S.€668,€686,€104€S.Ct.Ð H0@), Ð2052,€2064€(1984).€ÌœñEñÌñEñ›Ð è5à.2 Ðà ` àCounsel's€representation€is€deficient€if€the€errors€were€so€serious€as€toÏdeprive€the€appellant€of€representation€guaranteed€by€the€Sixth€Amendment.€ÏòòCox€v.€Stateóó,€880€S.W.2d€713,€717€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994).€€The€deficientÐ È À Ðrepresentation€becomes€prejudicial€when€said€representation€deprives€theÏappellant€of€a€fair€trial€with€a€reliable€result.€€òòIdóó.€€However,€this€court's€review€mayÐ ˆ€ Ðfirst€look€at€the€prejudice€prong€of€òòStricklandóó.€€If€the€court€finds€that€the€defendantÐ h`  Ðsuffered€no€prejudice,€a€deficiency,€if€any,€is€considered€harmless.€€òòStricklandóó,Ð H@  Ð466€U.S.€at€693,€104€S.Ct.€at€2067.€€Therefore,€even€if€there€are€attorney€errors,Ïthe€appellant€must€show€that€"there€is€a€reasonable€probability€that,€but€forÏcounsel's€unprofessional€errors,€the€result€of€the€proceeding€would€have€beenÏdifferent"€in€order€to€succeed€on€an€ineffectiveness€claim.€€òòStricklandóó,€466€U.S.€atÐ ÈÀ Ð693,€104€S.Ct.€at€2068.ÌÌà ` àThe€appellant€alleges€that€trial€counsel€failed€to€advise€him€of€the€chargesÏagainst€him,€failed€to€call€alibi€witnesses,€and€failed€to€prepare€for€trial.€€At€theÏpost„conviction€hearing,€the€appellant€failed€to€produce€any€alibi€witness.€€He€is,Ïtherefore,€unable€to€establish€that€he€suffered€prejudice€by€trial€counsel's€failureÏto€call€these€witnesses€at€trial.€€Additionally,€the€appellant€admitted€that€he€wasÏaware€of€the€possible€punishment€for€the€charges€before€proceeding€to€trial.€ÏAlso,€he€conceded€that€he€was€aware€of€the€State's€plea€offer€and€that€heÏdiscussed€his€case€and€strategy€for€trial€with€trial€counsel.€€Moreover,€EdwardÏHardister,€the€prosecutor€at€the€appellant's€trial,€testified€that€he€had€severalÏdiscussions€with€the€appellant's€trial€counsel€œpriorñGñ€toñGññHññGñ€ñGññHñ›€trial€and€that€counsel€hadÏaccess€to€all€reports€involving€the€appellant's€case.€€Furthermore,€the€courtÏrecalled€various€pre„trial€motions€filed€by€trial€counsel€and€that€counsel'sÏrepresentation€of€the€appellant€was€"more€than€adequate."€€ÌœñFñÌñFñ›Ð ¨9 26 Ðà ` àThe€burden€rests€with€the€appellant€to€prove€his€allegations€by€aÏpreponderance€of€the€evidence.€€òòTayloróó,€875€S.W.2d€at€686.€€The€post„convictionÐ èà Ðcourt€found€that€the€appellant€failed€to€carry€his€burden€of€proof.€€We€agree.€ÏAdditionally,€we€conclude€that€the€appellant€has€failed€to€carry€his€burden€ofÏshowing€that€either€prong€of€the€òòStricklandóó€test€has€been€met.€€Because€the€trialÐ ˆ€ Ðcourt's€findings€of€fact€are€afforded€the€weight€of€a€jury€verdict,€this€court€isÏbound€by€those€findings€unless€the€evidence€in€the€record€preponderates€againstÏthem.€€òòBlack€v.€Stateóó,€794€S.W.2d€752,€755€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990).€€TheÐ (  Ðevidence€in€the€record€before€us€supports€the€findings€of€the€trial€court.€ÏAccordingly,€we€affirm€the€trial€court's€order€denying€the€appellant€post„convictionÏñCñœñCñrelief.Ìñ2ñ›ñ2ñÌñ2ñ›ñ2ñÌñ2ñ›ñ2ñÓÓà ` àñ2ñ›ñ2ñà ¸ àñ2ñ›ñ2ñà  àñ2ñ›ñ2ñà h àñ2ñ›ñ2ñà À àñ2ñ›ñ2ñ____________________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JudgeÌÌÌñ0ññ/ñconcñ/ññ0ññ1ñCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ_____________________________ÌJOHN€H.€PEAY,€JudgeÌÌÌ_____________________________ÌPAUL€G.€SUMMERS,€Judgeñ1ññCñ›ñCñ