WPC 4# UN %A 0(Gbow@w4 B 0J 0TI 0^ 0D 0h? 0rU@ AO 0Dn 0| 0. 0 1uD U, 0d 0@I D3 D/ B U, U>4 U*r B) DC AM U v~SvHP LaserJet 4/4MHPPCL5E,,,,0 (9 Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($- - FPGDHEIEJPKELӀMNOv 3|xY d2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  (3$ !  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  ԃLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 `(ZapfCalligr BTTT$(C<< C($$   1  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23   ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)<  9p`(ModernP 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X("$     'dxd**' dxdP Pd<  9p`(Monaco<  9p`(&Times New Roman<  9p`(Arial% Line 7 d....7Border 1dd$/C << G  !  #d#,  "  ,  - eee FILED-X -ԀAugust2,1996 -X CecilCrowson,Jr.   - eee AppellateCourtClerk   XPtPtHH(FG(HH(d'`Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Monaco   BA Op Monaco  BA Op Monaco ! . &++Xd&#++Xd#,     ` -\RA'\7=XXdd7      L01/;+'h| `LߛINTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEEATJACKSONAPRILSESSION,1996  STATEOFTENNESSEE  ) C.C.A.NO.02C019508CR00222     )  Appellee,   )     )     ) SHELBYCOUNTYVS.     )      ) HON.BERNIEWEINMAN ALFREDD.FLOWERS,  ) PRESIDINGJUDGE      )  Appellant.   ) (PostConviction)   -ORDER-X    AppellantAlfredD.FlowersappealsfromthedismissalofhispetitionforpostconvictionrelieffiledintheShelbyCountyCriminalCourt.TherecordreflectsthatonJune24,1992,Appellantenteredaguiltypleatoseconddegreemurderaswellastosixcountsofaggravatedrobberyandoneofcriminalattemptforaggravatedrobbery.Onappeal,AppellantassertsthathereceivedtheineffectiveassistanceofcounselinviolationoftheSixthAmendment. Atthepostconvictionhearing,onlyAppellantandthetrialattorneytestified.Appellantmadeafewbriefallegationsrelatingtohisattorneyslackofpreparationincludingtheattorneysfailuretomeetwithhimandtoprocurewitnessesonhisbehalf.However,theattorneycontradictedanysuchsuggestiontestifyingthathehadmetwithAppellantatleastseventimes,hiredaninvestigatorforthecasewhointerviewednumerouswitnesses,andfileddozensofmotionsonAppellant'sbehalfinpreparationforthetrialofthecase.Furthermore,Appellantwasunabletopresentthenamesofanywitnessesortheexistenceofanyotherevidencewhichwouldhavebeenbeneficialtohisdefense. ItseemsthatthemainthrustofthisappealliesinAppellant'sclaimthathisguiltypleawasnotenteredvoluntarilybecauseitwasbasedonhisattorneysimproperadviceregardinghis releaseeligibilitydatepercentagethepercentageoftimethatadefendantmustservepriortoparoleorotherformsofreleaseeligibility.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4035101(1990)SentencingϜCommissionComments.Aspartofthepleaagreement,Appellantreceived,forthemurderconviction,asentenceof35yearsasaMultipleRangeIIoffenderwitha35%releaseeligibility.Heclaimedthathisattorneytoldhimthathewouldbeservingthe35yearsforthemurderchargeat30%insteadof35%.Heacknowledgedthat,becausehewasrelyingonwhathisattorneytoldhim,hedidnotreadthepapersthathesignedwhichclearlystatedtheREDpercentagewas35%.However,whenthetrialattorneytestifiedatthepostconvictionhearing,hesaidthathehadexplainedallofthepaperworktoAppellant. Inathoroughordercontainingits FindingsofFactandConclusionsofLaw,thetrialcourtmadethefollowingfindings:8 [Appellant]freelyandvoluntarilyenteredhisguiltypleasandunderstoodtheconsequencesofenteringthepleas.Itwouldappearfromtherecordthathisattorneythoroughlyinvestigatedthecase,filedallthenecessarymotionsandwaspreparedtotrythecaseifthedefendantdesiredtoproceedwiththetrial.Itwouldfurtherappearthatthedefenseattorneynegotiatedanextremelyfavorableguiltypleasettlementforhisclient.ItwouldappearthatthedefendantisattemptingtorenegotiatehispleatothemurderchargefromaRangeIIPersistentOffendertoaRangeIStandardOffender.TheCourt findsthedefendantunderstoodthetermsofhisguiltypleawhenhe enteredhispleaonJune24,1992.TheCourtfindsthattheadvice givenandservicesrenderedbythedefendantscounselwerewithintheϜ  rangeofcompetencydemandedbyanattorneyinacriminalcaseand thatthe[trialattorneys]representationofthedefendantatthisguiltypleaϜ compliedwiththerequirementssetoutbytheSupremeCourtofTennesseeϜ inthecaseofBaxterv.Rose,523S.W.2d930(Tenn.1975). Afterfullconsiderationoftherecord,thebriefs,andthelawgoverningtheissuespresentedbyAppellant,weareoftheopinionthattheevidencedoesnotpreponderateagainstthetrialcourt'sfindingsandconclusionsandthatnoerroroflawexiststhatwouldrequireareversal.Therefore,wedeterminethatthejudgmentofthetrialcourtshouldbeaffirmedinaccordancewithRule20oftheCourtCriminalAppeals.      ____________________________________     JERRYL.SMITH,JUDGECONCUR:___________________________________PAULG.SUMMERS,JUDGE___________________________________JOSEPHM.TIPTON,JUDGE