WPC UBV %nX 0P 4^ r 0x 0D w@P 0J 0T 0^. 0h 0r 0|f 0 0h 1u 0dmU6U*B)1 BZDCw AM(v~/v D3 0@ AOB 0D D/L B{<6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiX3|X <6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXx6X@JQX@%2A`ArialTTt10cpiXXX2PQXP(($D  ӝD H8(D(3$ !D      0  (#$  0   D >e  U U D   Ӏ 2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  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<  9p`(Courier New<  9p`(Arial% Line 7 d d####7Border 1dd-%C << G  !  #d#! D    ""   YYY FILED"XOctober10,1996CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerk  PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'@Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   BA Op Geneva  BA Op Geneva $$$$'dxd("$    -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! . ! D    `  X ћ7gXXdd7  \RA'\  Ӝ"ԛ  INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEEٜL&'%;+'h|` 81 `Lߛ       @ ATNASHVILLE  @ AUGUST1996SESSION DONALDW.BURLISON,   )       )  C.C.A.NO.01C019511CC00359   Appellant, 򀀀  )      ) HICKMANCOUNTY VS.      )      ) HON.CORNELIAA.CLARK,STATEOFTENNESSEE,   ) JUDGE      )  Appellee.    ) (Postconviction) FORTHEAPPELLANT:    FORTHEAPPELLEE: JOHNHENDERSON    CHARLESW.BURSON PublicDefender     AttorneyGeneral&Reporter LARRYD.DROLSUM     KARENM.YACUZZO Asst.PublicDefender    Asst.AttorneyGeneral407MainSt.      450JamesRobertsonPkwy.P.O.Box68      Nashville,TN372430493Franklin,TN370650068           JOED.BAUGH        DistrictAttorneyGeneral       RONALDL.DAVIS        Asst.DistrictAttorneyGeneral       P.O.Box937        Franklin,TN370650937                   OPINIONFILED:____________________ AFFIRMED JOHNH.PEAY, Judge  @ OPINION       Thepetitionerwasconvictedbyajuryoffirstdegreemurderandaggravatedassault.Hisconvictionswereaffirmedondirectappeal.Hesubsequentlyfiledapetitionforpostconvictionreliefallegingineffectiveassistanceofcounselatboththetrialandappeallevels,andanimproperjuryinstruction.Afteranevidentiaryhearing,thecourtbelowdismissedthepetition.Uponourreviewoftherecord,weaffirmthejudgmentbelow.   "Inpostconvictionreliefproceedingsthepetitionerhastheburdenofprovingtheallegationsinhispetitionbyapreponderanceoftheevidence."McBeev.State,655S.W.2d191,195(Tenn.Crim.App.1983).Furthermore,thefactualfindingsofthetrialcourtinhearings"areconclusiveonappealunlesstheevidencepreponderatesagainstthejudgment."Statev.Buford,666S.W.2d473,475(Tenn.Crim.App.1983).  Inreviewingthepetitioner'sSixthAmendmentclaimofineffectiveassistanceofcounsel,thisCourtmustdeterminewhethertheadvicegivenorservicesrenderedbytheattorneyarewithintherangeofcompetencedemandedofattorneysincriminalcases.Baxterv.Rose,523S.W.2d930,936(Tenn.1975).Toprevailonaclaimofineffectivecounsel,apetitioner"mustshowthatcounsel'srepresentationfellbelowanobjectivestandardofreasonableness"andthatthisperformanceprejudicedthedefense.Theremustbeareasonableprobabilitythatbutforcounsel'serrortheresultoftheproceedingwouldhavebeendifferent.Stricklandv.Washington,466U.S.668,68788,692,694(1984);Bestv.State,708S.W.2d421,422(Tenn.Crim.App.1985).̛̜̀  Onthisappeal,thepetitionercontendsthathistrialcounselwasineffectivebecausehefailedtoproperlyadvisethepetitionerabouttheStatespleabargainoffer;failedtoproperlyadvisehimabouthisrighttotestify;andfailedtoproperlyobjecttothetrialcourtsjuryinstructiononpremeditationanddeliberationinthecontextoffirstdegreemurder.Withrespecttothefirstofthesecontentions,thecourtbelowconsideredthehearingtestimonyofboththepetitionerandhistrialcounsel,ThomasWoodall,andmadeaspecific credibilityfindingin[Woodalls]favor.Thecourtfurtherfound thatpetitionerfullyunderstoodthetermsofthe[pleabargain]offerandtherelativestrengthsandweaknessesofgoingforward.Sincepetitionerrefusedtheoffer,anditwaslaterwithdrawn,thereislittleelsecounselcouldhavedoneexceptcontinuethetrial.Theevidencedoesnotpreponderateagainstthesefindings.Thisissueiswithoutmerit.  Astothepetitionersclaimthathislawyerdidnotadequatelyadvisehimwithrespecttohisrighttotestifyonhisownbehalf,thecourtbelowfoundasfollows:    [Petitioner]contendsthathetoldcounselitmightbebestforhimtotakethestandanddisputewhathadbeensaid[byaStateswitness].Heallegesthathiscounseladvisedhimnottotakethestandbecausehewouldnotbeagoodwitness.However,hehadnopriorfeloniesandnoseriousmisdemeanors.Hecontendsthathereliedsolelyontheadviceofcounselinmakingthisdecision.However,petitioneralsostatedthathedoubtedthathewouldhavetakenthestandanywaybecausehewasnotgoodatrememberingthings.Ifhehadtakenthestand,hewouldhavetestifiedthathedidnotseethevictimagainaftertheinitialfightoccurred.Hecouldhavetestifiedaboutwherehewassubsequently,toshowhewasnotnearthevicinitywhenthedeathoccurred.Itisthisstatementthatthecourtfindsmostamazing,andthatmakesitdifficulttoacceptanyothertestimonygivenbypetitioner.Thisisbecause,oncrossexamination,headmitted[tocontradictoryfacts].Thus,notonlydidhelieduringthishearing,butheessentiallyconcededthatthetestimonyhewouldhavegivenhadhetakenthestandinhisowndefenseattrialwouldhavebeenperjuredtestimony.[Mr.Woodall]testifiedthatpetitionermadecertainadmissionstohimthatwouldhavebeendamagingattrial. D   Theevidencedoesnotpreponderateagainstthecourtsfindings.Thisissueiswithoutmerit.  Withrespecttothejuryinstructionissue,thepetitionercontendsthathiscounselwasineffectiveforfailingtoobjecttotheinstructionattrial,andforfailingtoraiseitasanissueinthepetitionersdirectappeal.Thepetitioneralsoarguesthatthejuryinstructionwassoincorrectastorisetothelevelofaconstitutionalviolationcognizableinthispostconvictionproceeding.Becausewedisagreethatthejuryinstructionwasincorrect,wealsofindthatthepetitionerstrialcounselwasnotineffectivebecausehedidnotobjecttotheinstruction.  Therelevantinstructiondealtwiththedefinitionofpremeditationanddeliberationasrequiredforfirstdegreemurderandwasasfollows:        Apremeditatedactisonedoneaftertheexerciseofreflectionandjudgment.Premeditationmeansthattheintenttokillmusthavebeenformedpriortotheactitself.Suchintentordesigntokillmaybeconceivedanddeliberatelyformedinaverybriefperiodoftime.Itisnotnecessarythatthepurposetokillpreexistinthemindoftheaccusedforanydefiniteperiodoftime.Itissufficientthatitprecededtheact,howevershorttheinterval,aslongasitwastheresultofreflectionandjudgment. D   ThepetitionerreliesonStatev.Brown,836S.W.2d530(Tenn.1992),asrequiringthisinstructiontobefoundimproperbecauseofourSupremeCourtsholdinginthatcasethatajuryinstructionstatingthatpremeditationanddeliberationcanbeformedinaninstantisimproper.However,asnotedbythecourtbelow,ourSupremeCourt%  didnotholdinthatcasethatsuchaninstructionviolatedaconstitutionalright.Accordingly,postconvictionreliefisnotavailableonthisbasis.T.C.A.4030105(1990Repl.)(repealedMay10,1995).Moreover,thisCourthasrepeatedlyheldthatBrownshouldnotbeappliedretroactively.See,e.g.,Loftonv.State,898S.W.2d246,250(Tenn.Crim.App.1994),andcasescitedtherein.ThepetitionerstrialwasheldpriortotheBrowncase.Thisissueisthereforewithoutmerit.̜  Noreversibleerrorhavingbeencommitted,thejudgmentbelowisaffirmed.       ______________________________       JOHNH.PEAY,JudgeCONCUR:______________________________JOSEPHM.TIPTON,Judge______________________________DAVIDH.WELLES,Judge