WPC # VUBa % 0(b 0l 0DE 4   w@ 0J 0T6 0^ 0h 0rP 0| 0> 0 1uT U, 0d U,YU*B) BDC AM84*v~ D3av 0@g AO 0D 0D D/D BsHP LaserJet 4 Plus/4M PlusHPPCL5E,,,,0,hAZ*Helvetica RegularX($- -((3$ !      0  (#$  0  U_A '3|x EEDD[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)<  9p`(ModernP 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<  9p`(Monaco<  9p`(Arial% Line 7 d d####7Border 1dd-%C << G * !  #d#"  "  "   YYY FILED"X February8,1996CecilCrowson,Jr."AppellateCourtClerk   !#d#"   *Forexample,seeFrazierv.State,No.03C019302CR00042,1993WL462082,at*1(Tenn.Crim.App.Nov.10,1993)(inwhichPetitioner'spetitionforwritofhabeascorpuswas"moreproperlytreatedasapetitionforpostconvictionrelief");Frazierv.State,No.03C019212CR00416,1993WL358466(Tenn.Crim.App.Sept.14,1993);Frazierv.State,No.696,1986WL7804(Tenn.Crim.App.July11,1986).PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'@$$$$'dxdStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Monaco   BA: T Monaco  BA: T Monaco ("$    -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3$ !  ($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! . &!!Xd&#!!Xd#"     ` \RA'\7XXdd7      L&'%;+'h|`  `LINTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEEATKNOXVILLEDECEMBERSESSION,1995  DEWEYSCOTTFRAZIER ) C.C.A.NO.03C019505CR00142     )  Appellant,   )     )     ) SULLIVANCOUNTYVS.     )      ) HON.FRANKL.SLAUGHTER STATEOFTENNESSEE ,  ) JUDGE      )  Appellee.   ) (PostConvictionRelief)   ONAPPEALFROMTHEJUDGMENTOFTHECRIMINALCOURTOFSULLIVANCOUNTY  FORTHEAPPELLANT:   FORTHEAPPELLEE:DEWEYSCOTTFRAZIER,prose CHARLESW.BURSON#79977     AttorneyGeneralandReporterP.O.Box5000 MountainCity,TN37683   CLINTONJ.MORGAN      AssistantAttorneyGeneral      450JamesRobertsonParkway      Nashville,TN37243      GREELEYWELLS      DistrictAttorneyGeneral       BARRYP.STAUBUS      AssistantDistrictAttorney      Blountville,TN37617AFFIRMEDOPINIONFILED________________________JERRYL.SMITH,JUDGE  "OPINION "X   InthisprosecasetheAppellant,DeweyScottFrazier,appealsthesummarydismissalofthelatestinalonglineofpostconvictionreliefpetitionsfiledbyAppellant* ,    # u`  (   .ThetrialcourtdismissedthepetitionasbarredunderthethreeyearstatuteoflimitationsinTenn.CodeAnn.4030102andonwaivergrounds.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4030112.Becausethepetitionfailstopresentanylegitimateexceptiontothestatuteoflimitationsforpostconvictionpetitions,weaffirmthedismissal. Tenn.CodeAnn.4030102providesthatapostconvictionpetitionmustbefiled"withinthreeyearsofthedateofthefinalactionofthehigheststateappellatecourttowhichanappealistaken"orbetimebarred.However,inBurfordV.State,845S.W.2d204(Tenn.1992),theTennesseeSupremeCourtcreatedanexceptiontothisstatuteoflimitations.InBurfordtheCourtheldthatapostconvictionpetitionmaybefiledbeyondthestatuteoflimitationsifthepetitionpresentsgroundsbasedonaconstitutionalrightdiscoveredbythecourtsafterexpirationoftherelevantthreeyearperiod,andthenewlydiscoveredconstitutionalrightrequiresretroactiveapplication. InhispetitiontheAppellant,whowasconvictedofstatebankrobberychargesandsentencedasahabitualcriminalin1976,claimstheBurfordexceptiontothestatuteoflimitationsappliestohim.HebasesthisargumentontheUnitedStatesSupremeCourtcaseofBeechamv.UnitedStates,___U.S.___,114S.Ct.1669,128L.Ed.2d383(1994).Beechaminvolvedafederalstatutewhichcriminalizespossessionofafirearmbyaconvictedfelon.However,aconvictionwhichhasbeen"expunged,orsetasideorforwhichapersonhasbeenpardonedorhashadcivilrightsrestoredshallnotbeconsideredaconviction",forpurposesofthestatute.18U.S.C.921(a)(20). ThedefendantsinBeecham,convictedunderthefederalstatute,claimedthattheirpriorfederalconvictionscouldnotbeusedagainstthembecausetheircivilrightshadbeenrestoredpursuanttostatelaw.Thecourtheldasamatteroffederalstatutoryinterpretationthatarestorationofcivilrightsforfederalfelonsmustbepursuanttofederallaw.Astaterestorationofcivilrightswillnotsufficetoclaimtheexemptionof18U.S.C.921(a)(20)inthecaseoffederalfelonies. DespitetheAppellant'sclaimthattheholdinginBeecham,asamatterofconstitutionallaw,invalidatesthepriorconvictionsusedtoenhanceAppellant'ssentencetohabitualcriminalstatus,itisclearthatthereisnotanewconstitutionalrightannouncedinBeecham.ThiscasemerelydealswithfederalstatutoryinterpretationandassuchoffersAppellantnorelieffromthestatuteoflimitationsforpostconvictionpetitions.  Inviewofthisholding,werejecttheAppellant'scontentionthatappointmentofcounselandanevidentiaryhearingwerenecessarytoensuretheAppellant'sconstitutionalorstatutoryrights.Whenacompetentlydraftedpostconvictionpetitionconclusivelyshowsthatthepetitionerisnotentitledtorelief,itmaybedismissedwithoutappointmentofcounselandwithoutanevidentiaryhearing.Swansonv.State,749S.W.2d731(Tenn.1988). Accordinglythejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirmed.        ____________________________________     JERRYL.SMITH,JUDGECONCUR:___________________________________DAVIDG.HAYES,JUDGE___________________________________WILLIAMM.BARKER,JUDGE