ÿWPC …U:V % 0Ü–w@r 4² Æ Õ 0 Ý 0Dý 0JA 0T‹ 0^ß 0h= 0r¥ 0| 0†“ 0 1u© 0d B‚U*ŸB)ÉDCò AM5²‚t4v~¨vÓ& D3ù 0@, AOlÆ» 0D D/Å Bô, øð AZ‹"Arial RegularX(´`$¡¡Ñ°ÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€‰GXXdðXXdð7ÑÑ  Ñ ­®D¯°[±²³U´Eµ¶Ó€·‚^!3|xÁ(Ð(3W$¤¤Ý ƒ`!ÝѰÑÒ°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ7€LçXXdæXXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ýà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ d< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d!!!!7Border 1dd€-"Cþÿ << Gÿÿ ¨Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ! ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€ ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€ XÔÌÌò òMarch€11,Ï1997ÌÌCecilÏCrowson,ÏJr.ÌÔ€ ôÔAp…pellateÏCourtÏClerkó ó jÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€d#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  ÝÔ€ ôÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ7ÀLçXXdæXXdð7Ñà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóThese€offenses€occurred€in€October,€1986.€€As€a€result€of€these€convictions,€theÏappellant€is€serving€two€consecutive€life€sentences€plus€one€hundred€years.ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ ÔÑ  ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ#€Xd#ÑÑ#€Xd#ÑÑ  ÑÝ  Ý›ò òÞ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEE̜ـ€ÙßR€#$"A1-j|` | `€€@ÿRß›à@ àAT€KNOXVILLEÌà@ àDECEMBER€SESSION,€1996Ìó óÌÌÌÌò òCHICO€LOPEZ€CHIGANOó ó,à à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€03C01„9602„CR„00061Ìà àAppellantà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àKNOX€COUNTYÌvs.à àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àHon.€Ray€L.€Jenkins,€JudgeÌò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEó ó,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à à(Post„Conviction)Ìà àAppelleeà àà àà à)ÌÌÌÌòòFor€the€Appellantóó:à àà àà àà àòòFor€the€Appelleeóó:ÌÌMark€Stephensà àà àà àà àCharles€W.€BursonÌKnox€County€Public€Defenderà àà àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌà àÌDavid€Gallà àà àà àà àà àTimothy€F.€BehanÌAsst.€Public€Defenderà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€General€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ï1209€Euclid€Avenueà àà àà àCriminal€Justice€DivisionÌKnoxville,€TN€€37921à àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493à àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àRandall€E.€NicholsÌà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àRobert€JolleyÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAsst.€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àCity„County€BuildingÌà àà àà àà àà àà àKnoxville,€TN€€37902ÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌÌÌò òDavid€G.€Hayesó óÌJudgeÇÓÓà@ àòòò òOPINIONóóó óÌÌà àThe€appellant,€Chico€Lopez€Chigano,€appeals€the€Knox€County€CriminalÏCourt's€dismissal€of€his€petition€for€post„conviction€relief.€€On€appeal,€theÏappellant€raises€only€one€issue:€Whether€his€trial€counsel€was€ineffective€forÏfailure€to€request€an€accomplice€instruction€at€trial.ÌÌà àAfter€a€review€of€the€record,€we€conclude€that€the€appellant's€contentionÏis€without€merit.€€The€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.ÌÌà@ àÌà@ àò òI.€€Backgroundó óÌÌà àThe€appellant€was€convicted€of€aggravated€kidnapping,€assault€withÏintent€to€commit€first€degree€murder€of€Brelen€Stovall,€first€degree€murder€ofÏHenry€Dodson,€and€two€counts€of€armed€robbery.× ƒ% ××  ×€€Throughout€most€of€theÏcrime€spree€leading€to€these€convictions,€the€appellant€was€accompanied€byÏAngela€Brodie.€€At€trial,€the€appellant€acknowledged€his€guilt€for€the€attemptedÏmurder€of€Stovall€and€the€armed€robberies.€€òòSeeóó€€òòState€v.€Chiganoóó,€No.€1333Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Knoxville,€Sept.€26,€1991),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.ÍMar.€23,€1992).€€The€issue€before€this€court€only€relates€to€the€eventsÏsurrounding€the€murder€of€Henry€Dodson.€The€appellant's€theory€at€trial€wasÏthat€Angela€Brodie,€and€not€he,€shot€and€killed€Dodson.€€Although€circumstantialÏevidence€linked€the€appellant€to€Dodson's€murder,€the€only€direct€evidenceÏoffered€at€trial€to€establish€that€the€appellant€killed€Dodson€was€BrodieððsÏtestimony.€€Based€on€these€facts,€the€jury€found€the€appellant€guilty€of€the€firstÏdegree€murder€of€Dodson.ÌÌà àThe€appellant€filed€the€present€petition€for€post„conviction€relief€on€July€8,Ï1993,€alleging€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€on€fifteen€grounds.€€At€the€post„conviction€hearing,€James€Varner€and€Robert€Simpson,€the€appellant's€trialÏcounsel€testified.€€Varner€stated€that€an€accomplice€instruction€was€neverÏconsidered€because€the€defense€strategy€was€that€the€appellant€was€notÏinvolved€in€the€murder€of€Henry€Dodson.€€He€explained€that€"to€suggest€that€heÏwas€an€accomplice€or€to€request€an€accomplice€instruction,€as€it€related€toÏAngela€Brodie,€would€have€been€to€suggest€that€he€was€involved,€which€wouldÏhave€been€contrary€to€our€theory€of€defense."€€Simpson€confirmed€Varner'sÏassertion€that€the€defense€strategy€was€that€"Angela€Brodie,€not€[the€appellant],€Ï.€.€.€killed€Mr.€Dodson€.€.€.€and€that€her€story€was€her€fabrication."€€He€explainedÏthat:€ÌÓÓà8 à.€.€.€[Brodie]€was€a€witness€whose€testimony€we€could€impeach.€.€.€.ÏSo,€we€felt€a€strong€attack€on€her€testimony€coupled€with€[theÍappellant's]€statement€of€what€did€happen€that€night,€warts€and€all,Ïwould€be€compelling€and€very€possibly€we€would€get€a€not€guiltyÏon€the€murder.€€We€came€in€and€pled€guilty€to€the€shooting€of€Mr.ÏStovall€and€armed€robberies.€€I€recall€.€.€.€€trying€to€send€to€the€juryÏthe€message€that,€'What€we€have€done,€we€will€fess€up€to,€andÏwhat€we€haven't€we€are€not€going€to€take€laying€down.'ÌÌÓÓThe€appellant€chose€not€to€testify€at€the€post„conviction€hearing€and€relied€uponÏthe€allegations€set€forth€in€his€petition.€€In€denying€the€appellant€relief,€the€trialÏcourt€accredited€the€testimony€of€trial€counsel€finding€that€"an€accompliceÏinstruction€was€not€involved€and€was€contradictory€with€the€defense€strategy."ÌÌÌà@ àò òII.€€Analysisó óÌÌ€à àThe€appellant€challenges€his€trial€counselððs€œperformance›€for€failing€toÏrequest€a€jury€instruction€regarding€accomplice€œtestimony,€thus,›€alleging€aÏconstitutional€denial€of€the€effective€assistance€of€counsel,€as€guaranteed€by€theÏSixth€Amendment€of€the€United€States€Constitution.€€To€succeed€in€such€aÏchallenge,€the€appellant€must€show,€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence,ÏòòTaylor€v.€Stateóó,€875€S.W.2d€684,€686€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993),€òòperm.€to€appealÏdeniedóó,€(Tenn.€1994),€that€counsel's€representation€fell€below€the€range€ofÏcompetence€demanded€of€attorneys€in€criminal€cases,€€€òòBaxter€v.€Roseóó,€523ÏS.W.2d€930,€936€(Tenn.€1975),€and€that,€but€for€these€errors,€there€exists€aÏreasonable€probability€that€the€result€of€the€proceeding€would€have€beenÍdifferent.€€òòStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466€U.S.€668,€694,€104€S.Ct.€2052,€2068Ï(1984);€òòState€v.€Melsonóó,€772€S.W.2d€417,€419€n.2€(Tenn.),€òòcert.€deniedóó,€493ÏU.S.€874,€110€S.Ct.€211€(1989).€€€In€determining€whether€the€appellant€receivedÏeffective€assistance€of€counsel,€this€court€must€remain€mindful€that€it€is€not€ourÏfunction€to€second€guess€trial€counsel's€tactical€and€strategic€choices€on€mattersÏof€defense,€unless€these€choices€are€made€without€knowledge€of€the€relevantÏfacts€or€the€law€applicable€to€the€issue.€€òòHellard€v.€Stateóó,€629€S.W.2d€4,€9€(Tenn.Ï1982);€òòState€v.€Swansonóó,€680€S.W.2d€487,€490€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1984).ÌÌà àAfter€review€of€the€record€before€us,€we€conclude€that€trial€counsel'sÏstrategy€of€not€requesting€an€accomplice€charge€was€a€reasonable€defenseÏstrategy.€€The€appellant's€defense€was€that€he€did€not€murder€Dodson.€ÏRequesting€an€accomplice€charge€would€have€conflicted€with€this€defense.€€IfÏthe€jury€were€told€that€Brodie's€testimony€was€suspect€because€of€her€complicityÏin€the€crimes,€the€necessary€implication€would€be€that€the€appellant€participatedÏin€the€criminal€activity€of€which€he€claims€to€be€innocent.€€Thus,€trial€counselÏcould€not€logically€argue€that€the€appellant€had€an€accomplice€to€a€crime€thatÏthe€appellant€did€not€commit.€€The€appellant's€trial€counsel,€consequently,Ïchose€to€forego€requesting€an€accomplice€charge.€€We€must€indulge€a€strongÏpresumption€that€counselððs€conduct€falls€within€the€wide€range€of€reasonableÏprofessional€assistance.€€òòStricklandóó,€466€U.S.€at€689,€104€Sct.€at€2065.ÌÌà àWhere€it€is€apparent€that€the€action€claimed€to€constitute€ineffectivenessÏwas€within€the€realm€of€trial€tactics€or€strategy,€we€will€not€disturb€the€judgmentÏbelow.€€òòSeeóó€€òòState€v.€Martinóó,€627€S.W.2d€139,€142€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1981).€ÏMoreoever,€in€order€for€the€appellant€to€prevail€in€this€collateral€attack,€the€proofÏmust€establish€that€had€the€questioned€accomplice€instruction€been€given€to€theÏjury,€there€is€a€ð ðreasonable€probabilityðð€that€the€appellant€would€have€beenÏacquitted.€€òòStricklandóó,€466€U.S.€at€œ693,›€104€S.Ct.€at€2068.€€Thus,€it€would€requireÏthis€court€œto›€conclude€œthat›€the€jury€would€have€found€Brodie€to€be€an€accompliceÏòòandóó€œthat€there›€was€no€evidence,€either€direct€or€circumstantial,€whichÏð ðlegitimately€tends€to€connect€the€defendant€with€the€commission€of€the€crimeÏcharged.ðð€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòState€v.€Bigeeóó,€885€S.W.2d€797,€803€(Tenn.€1994)€(quotingÏòòState€v.€Gayloróó,€862€S.W.2d€546,€552€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€œ1992)).›€€€The€proof€inÏthe€record€does€not€support€this€œconclusion.Ì›œÌ›œà à›œIn€consideration€of€the€foregoing€and€the€record€as€a€whole,€we€concludeÏthat€the€evidence€does€not€preponderate€against€the€trial€courtððs€findings€whichÏresulted€in€a€denial€of€relief.€€The€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.›ÌÌœ›ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà à____________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JudgeÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌ______________________________ÌDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JudgeÌÌÌ______________________________ÌTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€Judge