ÿWPC¨ ¹Ù%hJ;}y¯x^f ÊÓÆPV¼Âsf••]|èy;X›Ù¼äû)ÈT’UXº!aç­˜å2ÒÏð‡ÄÇN>Ô{ÇU¶HÃTý}U&ßûÇ+¦œFç(•Ó*N¨üßš”WÎkäÇ«±Ð@/¹‘öÔI™z*±x• ÏLxUžøEÎzþXam“Ž›{¨¿Ïañ%eÙM½àLÄšuë8i™`–=QÁ8,™ ‚ nÞù¯aPÕöà »½¤>úX>&–åÁ}p(u€Ç寡/¾PDÇ¡·Àér{8bË œ¸µña@žäˆF»ØÞùP8f¼9ËA‡¾¯÷1iòœTIç¾:J„ÿ*[—Í ÷ø–ØoUó {^G±’;teýRËÿÚN„!ÌFã ÜsCóàéÊÊó€Î˜Òšr2ÀâÕ™(ç1˜0½æ?ÃðEßáÀ °Ò)ãëpý‘Žy RÕ¥5ƒWRÞ¥(3ð á+gY+B¿,-i“w›Â12Xå;'Pw%_‘âz³¸v/p¬gi"Ã[1h1¶þü(ýúŠ£¥&Šˆ¼}ô¤OŒÑ‰~Vt)všYRO«Å‡§h{]]E£'ÏJ{‘æÝŸ`UN@ %Ž 0(”U:¼wö4ú–³ 0§» b 0Dd m¨ W¿ #! 727U:iN£ 1u¥r 0cŒU:ïU:)^ cccccccccc BooooooŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒŒ AQ’Æã 0D© 0Dí 0D11 D3u(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡, øð AZ‹"Arial Regular{Z='zB8B3|xPost-Conviction - Agg. RapeTiptonÏ ' IB012R120IB012R12 .   (W(2w$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€&j>%XXÔà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ MÝ ƒ[¯"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€X äXXXÔÔ€9XX äÔÓ  ÓÔ_Ôò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€X äX9ÔÐ  ÐÌSeptember€20,€1999ÌÌCecil€Ô_ÔCrowsonÔ_Ô,€Jr.ÌAppellate€Court€Ô_ÔClerkÔdAxÔó óÔ_Ô˜HP LaserJet 8000 DN PSØÚØÚÚØØÚ0i),S¼AZ‹"Arial Regular##37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a) hÔ€XrXXXÔÝ ƒ x×ÿÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€&q§%XXrÔà ` àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€ô[ò%&q§ÔA€reading€of€the€original€trial€transcript€shows€that€petitioner,€not€the€victim,€requested€that€theÐ  Ðclerk€call€for€help.Ô€ô[òòô[Ô(;3£$´´Ô2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à,æ™) AZ"Arial Regular, øð AZ"Arial Regular±Œ4'  d üÝ ƒ x×$ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÔ€&r<%XXÔà ` àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€&q§%%&r<ÔÔ€ô[ò%&q§ÔWe€have€consolidated€duplicate€claims€set€out€by€the€petitioner.Z[\]_Cþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó""""'ÿÿdxdÝ ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÒ°ÒѰÑÑܰÑÒX°ÒÔ€X äXXXÔÓ  ÓÑTR[° AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÑ8€ äXXdædÈ8ÑÔ_Ôßv€Y_@0,j:úÿ`  `€€@ÿE ` 8ttxPRð  vßÔ_ÔÔ_Ôà@Ñ Ñ DàIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ  ÐÌà@)DàAT€NASHVILLEˆÌÌà@ii'DàJUNE€1999€SESSIONˆÌÌÌÌDONALD€WAYNE€HOLT,à@##/Dà)ˆÐ 80 Ðà@##/Dà)ˆà p àNo.€01C01„9805„CC„00201Ð   Ðà ` àAppellant,à@##/Dà)ˆÐ ü  Ðà@##/Dà)ˆà p àRutherford€CountyÐ êâ  Ðv.à@##/Dà)ˆÐ ÐÈ  Ðà@##/Dà)ˆà p àHon.€James€K.€Clayton,€Jr.,€JudgeÐ ¶®  ÐSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à@##/Dà)ˆà p àÐ œ”  Ðà@##/Dà)ˆÌà ` àAppellee.à@##/Dà)ˆà p à(Post„Conviction)Ð h` ÐÌÌÌÒ(ä „¸ @€%€%(ÒòòFor€the€Appellantóó:Ð ø ÐÌW.H.€Stephenson€IIÌ311€White€Bridge€RoadÌNashville,€TN€€37209Ð ˜ ÐòòFor€the€Appelleeóó:Ð ø ÐÌPaul€G.€SummersÌAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌà È àandÌMarvin€E.€Clements,€Jr.ÌAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌCordell€Hull€Building,€2nd€FloorÌ425€Fifth€Avenue€NorthÌNashville,€TN€€37243„0493ÌÌWilliam€C.€Whitesell,€Jr.ÌDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌ303€Rutherford€Co.€Judicial€Bldg.ÌMurfreesboro,€TN€€37130Ð ”%Œ& ÐÒ(ä „¸ @ìì(ÒÐ `'X & ÐÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ v/n(/ ÐÌÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌÌÌJoseph€M.€Tipton,ÌJudgeÐ  Œ7„08 ÐÔ_ÔÓÓÑ  ÑÑ8€rXXdæXXdæ8Ñà@+Dàò òòòOPINIONó óóó€ˆÐ  ÐÓ  ÓÌà ` àThe€petitioner€appeals€as€of€right€from€the€order€of€the€Rutherford€County€CircuitÐ   ˜ ÐCourt€denying€him€post„conviction€relief€from€his€1991€conviction€for€aggravated€rapeÐ l d Ðand€his€resulting€twenty„two€year€sentence.€€This€court€affirmed€the€conviction€on€directÐ 80 Ðappeal.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Donald€Wayne€Holtóó,€No.€01C01„9503„CC„00053,€RutherfordÐ ü  ÐCounty€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€Sept.€27,€1995).€€The€petitioner€contends€that€the€trial€courtÐ ÐÈ  Ðerred€in€determining€that€he€received€the€effective€assistance€of€counsel€at€his€trial.€Ð œ”  ÐUpon€a€complete€review€of€the€record,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.€€Ð h` ÐÌà@ªª&Dàò òPROCEDURAL€HISTORYó óˆÐ ø Ðà ` àA€Rutherford€County€jury€convicted€the€petitioner€of€aggravated€rape.€€This€courtÐ ÌÄ Ðset€forth€the€following€statement€of€the€facts€on€direct€appeal:€€Ð ˜ ÐÓÓÓ  Ó€à8 ` àà8¸ ` (#` (#àOn€July€11,€1990,€the€victim€became€21€years€of€age.€After€herÐ d\ Ðdate€for€the€evening€did€not€show€up,€she€left€home€andÐ JB Ðconsumed€a€considerable€amount€of€liquor.€€Around€midnight,Ð 0 ( Ðthe€victim€stopped€at€the€Kroger€parking€lot€in€Smyrna,Ð ! ÐTennessee€to€use€the€telephone.€She€planned€to€call€herÐ ü!ô Ðbrother€because€she€was€too€intoxicated€to€drive.€€TheÐ â"Ú Ðappellant€and€two€of€his€acquaintances€were€at€the€parking€lot.€Ð È#À  ÐThe€appellant€walked€over€and€introduced€himself€to€the€victim.€Ð ®$¦! ÐAfter€conversing€for€about€twenty€minutes,€the€appellantÐ ”%Œ" Ðpersuaded€the€victim€to€allow€him€to€drive€her€home.€€Ðz&r#¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` (#` (#àAfter€leaving€the€parking€lot,€the€victim€passed€out€and€awokeÐ F(>!% Ðwhen€the€appellant€was€stopped€by€the€police€for€speeding.€€AtÐ ,)$"& Ðthat€point,€they€were€in€LaVergne,€Tennessee.€€The€appellantÐ * #' Ðand€the€victim€followed€the€police€to€the€police€station.€€WhenÐ ø*ð#( Ðthe€appellant€went€into€the€station,€the€victim€attempted€toÐ Þ+Ö$) Ðdrive€her€vehicle€away,€but€one€of€the€[policemen]€preventedÐ Ä,¼%* Ðher€from€doing€so€because€of€her€intoxication.€€The€victimÐ ª-¢&+ Ðpassed€out€again€and€woke€up€when€the€appellant€came€backÐ .ˆ', Ðto€the€car.€The€victim€again€asked€the€appellant€to€carry€herÐ v/n(- Ðhome,€but,€instead,€the€appellant€drove€to€a€secluded€area.€€€Ð\0T).¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` (#` (#àAfter€stopping,€the€appellant€removed€the€victim's€pants,€andÐ (2 +0 Ðforced€her€to€have€oral€sex,€vaginal€sex,€anal€sex,€and€oral€sexÐ 3,1 Ðagain.€€During€this€time,€the€victim€screamed€and€attempted€toÐ ô3ì,2 Ðpush€the€appellant€away,€but€she€could€not€get€up.€€After€theÐ Ú4Ò-3 Ðappellant€made€the€victim€engage€in€oral€sex€the€second€time,Ð À5¸.4 Ðshe€pretended€she€was€vomiting€and€then€acted€as€if€she€couldÐ ¦6ž/5 Ðnot€breathe.€€This€alarmed€the€appellant,€and,€consequently,Ð Œ7„06 Ðthey€left€to€seek€medical€treatment.€€Ðr8j17¸ Ð ¸ Ð  Їà8 ` àà8¸ ` (#` (#àThe€appellant€and€the€victim€stopped€at€a€convenience€store,Ð  Ðand€the€victim€requested€the€attendant€call€an€ambulance.׃×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€Ð îæ ÐThe€appellant€then€came€into€the€store,€and€the€victim€beganÐ ÔÌ Ðkicking€her€feet€and€throwing€her€hands€at€him.€He€was€told€toÐ º ² Ðleave€by€the€attendant.€€The€victim€told€the€attendant€that€sheÐ   ˜ Ðhad€been€raped.€€The€attendant€called€911€which€called€theÐ † ~ Ðpolice€and€an€ambulance.€€Ðl d¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` (#` (#àDr.€Sharon€Piper,€a€medical€doctor€specializing€in€obstetricsÐ 80 Ðand€gynecology,€testified€as€an€expert€witness.€Dr.€PiperÐ   Ðtreated€the€victim€at€the€Vanderbilt€hospital€and€assisted€inÐ ü  Ðsurgery.€The€victim€sustained€painful€injuries€to€her€vagina,Ð êâ  Ðrectum,€and€perineum.€€Over€the€objection€of€the€appellant,€Dr.Ð ÐÈ  ÐPiper€gave€the€following€testimony:ж® ¸ Ð ¸ Ð  Ѐ€Ð œ”  Ѐ€€à8 ` àà8¸ ` (#` (#à"Q.€Doctor,€again,€do€you€have€a€medical€opinion€as€to€whatÐ ‚z  Ðcaused€this€type€of€injury?€€Ðh`¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` (#` (#à€A.€Well,€her€external€exam€had€revealed€the€possibility€ofÐ 4, Ðforced€intercourse.€€We€weren't€quite€sure€about€the€internalÐ  Ðinjury.€€The€thought€did€cross€my€mind,€was€a€blunt€instrumentÐ ø Ðused.€€€ÐæÞ¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` (#` (#àQ.€Could€the€injury€that€you€observed,€the€laceration€inside€theÐ ²ª Ðvagina€based€upon€a€reasonable€degree€of€medical€certainty,Ð ˜ Ðcould€that€have€been€caused€by€the€fact€that€the€vagina€did€notÐ ~v Ðexpand€and€did€not€lubricate?€€€Ðd\¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` (#` (#àA.€Yes,€sir.€.€.€€Ð0 (¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` (#` (#àQ.€Now,€back€to€the€question€I€started€to€ask,€do€you€have€anÐ ü!ô Ðopinion€based€upon€a€reasonable€medical€certainty,€basedÐ â"Ú Ðupon€the€injuries€that€you€observed€as€to€whether€thisÐ È#À  Ðintercourse€was€forced€or€not€forced€intercourse?€€Ð®$¦!¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` (#` (#àA.€Due€to€the€extent€of€her€injuries,€I€do€not€feel€that€this€canÐ z&r# Ðbe€voluntary."€€Ð`'X $¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` (#` (#àThe€appellantððs€defense€was€that€the€victim€consented€to€sex.€Ð ,)$"& ÐÐ ¸ Ð ¸ Ð  Ðà8 ` àà8¸ ` (#` (#àThe€appellant€testified€that€he€saw€the€victim€at€the€KrogerÐ ø*ð#( Ðparking€lot€at€approximately€midnight.€He€found€her€attractiveÐ Þ+Ö$) Ðand€engaged€her€in€conversation.€€After€talking€for€aboutÐ Ä,¼%* Ðtwenty€minutes,€the€victim€gave€the€appellant€the€keys€to€herÐ ª-¢&+ Ðcar.€€The€victim€told€him€it€was€her€birthday,€and€she€wanted€toÐ .ˆ', Ðparty.€They€went€to€LaVergne€because€a€convenience€storeÐ v/n(- Ðthere€sold€beer€until€3:00€a.m.€€He€was€stopped€by€police€forÐ \0T). Ðspeeding€but€gave€the€officers€his€brother's€name€because€heÐ B1:*/ Ðdid€not€have€a€license.€€After€leaving€the€police€station,€theÐ (2 +0 Ðvictim€said€she€wanted€to€go€home,€but€then€said€she€did€notÐ 3,1 Ðbecause€she€would€get€into€trouble.€While€driving€down€theÐ ô3ì,2 Ðroad,€the€victim€grabbed€the€appellant€by€the€neck,€kissed€him,Ð Ú4Ò-3 Ðand€told€him€he€was€cute.€€The€appellant€suggested€they€goÐ À5¸.4 Ðparking€and€have€sex€to€which€€the€victim€agreed.€AccordingÐ  Ðto€[petitioner],€the€victim€willingly€engaged€in€the€sexualÐ îæ Ðactivities€which€she€had€earlier€described,€and€she€enjoyed€theÐ ÔÌ Ðsexual€acts.€€After€the€victim€became€ill,€they€left€to€seekÐ º ² Ðmedical€treatment.€€Ð  ˜¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÓ7ÓÌÓ  Óà8 ` àà8¸ ` (#` (#àThe€appellant€attempted€to€corroborate€his€claim€of€consent€byÐ l d Ðtestimony€that€he€was€struck€by€lightning€a€few€days€before€theÐ R J Ðincident,€and€this€injury€incapacitated€him€to€a€degree€that€heÐ 80 Ðcould€not€physically€force€the€victim€to€have€sex.€€€Ð ¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌòòÓÓÓ  ÓDonald€Wayne€Holtóó,€slip.€op.€at€2„5.€€Additional€information€was€included€in€footnotesÐ êâ  Ðone€and€two€of€the€opinion:Ð ¶®  ÐÓÓÓ  Óà8 ` àà8¸ ` (#` (#à1.€€The€victim€is€five€foot€two€inches€tall€and€weighs€88€pounds.€Ð ‚z  ÐShe€testified€that€she€had€not€previously€engaged€in€sex,€andÐ h` Ðher€testimony€was€corroborated€by€Dr.€Sharon€Piper.€€TheÐ NF Ðvictim€had€a€number€of€medical€conditions€including€a€commonÐ 4, Ðvariable€hypogammaglobulinenia,€a€blood€disorder,€severeÐ  Ðbronchiectasis,€a€condition€of€the€lungs,€and€a€nutritionalÐ ø Ðcondition€which€required€a€porta-cath€(a€permanent€IV)€in€herÐ æÞ Ðchest.€€ÐÌĸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌà8 ` àà8¸ ` (#` (#à2.€€Dr.€Piper€testified€to€these€specific€injuries.€There€was€aÐ ˜ Ðone€centimeter€tear€on€the€right€lateral€aspect€of€the€urinaryÐ ~v Ðopening.€There€were€multiple€abrasions€on€the€labia.€ThereÐ d\ Ðwas€a€one€centimeter€perennial€tear.€€The€entire€perennial€areaÐ JB Ðwas€undergoing€the€initial€stages€of€severe€bruising.€The€victimÐ 0 ( Ðhad€partial€rectal€prolapse.€Her€rectum€was€actually€comingÐ ! Ðoutside€of€her€body.€€The€anal€area€was€very€swollen€and€theÐ ü!ô Ðmuscle€tone€was€gone.€The€victim€had€a€five€centimeterÐ â"Ú Ðlaceration€in€her€vagina.€These€injuries€necessitated€extensiveÐ È#À  Ðsurgery€and€the€victim€was€hospitalized€at€Vanderbilt€from€JulyÐ ®$¦! Ð12,€1990€to€July€21,€1990.€€The€total€medical€bills€were€inÐ ”%Œ" Ðexcess€of€$€19,000.00.Ðz&r#¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌÓÓòòId.óó€at€3.Ð F(>!% ÐÌÓ  Óà ` àIn€his€direct€appeal,€the€petitioner€challenged€the€sufficiency€of€the€evidence,€theÐ Þ+Ö$) Ðadmission€of€Dr.€Sharon€Piperððs€testimony€that€the€victimððs€injuries€were€caused€byÐ ª-¢&+ Ðforce,€the€exclusion€of€David€Meadorððs€testimony€regarding€the€victimððs€priorÐ v/n(- Ðinconsistent€statement,€and€the€sentence.€€This€court€affirmed€the€judgment€of€the€trialÐ B1:*/ Ðcourt.Ð 3,1 ÐÌÌà@DD/Dàò òˆÐ r8j17 Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  à€€€€€€€€€€€€CONTENTIONS€OF€THE€PETITIONERó óÐ  Ðà ` àThe€petition€for€post„conviction€relief€alleges€ineffective€assistance€of€counselÐ ÔÌ Ðand€cites€the€following€errors€by€trial€counsel:׃(×Ý ƒ #ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ð   ˜ ÐÓÓÓ  Óà ` àà8 ¸ à1.à8¸ Ð ¸ Ð àfailure€to€investigate€the€case€sufficiently;€€Ðl dxx ÐÌà ` àà8 ¸ à2.à8¸ Ð ¸ Ð àfailure€to€present€a€defense€within€the€requiredÐ 80 Ðrange€of€competence;€Ð xx ÐÌà ` àà8 ¸ à3.à8¸ Ð ¸ Ð àfailure€to€cross„examine€the€stateððs€witnessesÐ êâ  Ðproperly;€€ÐÐÈ xx Ðà ` àà8 ¸ à4.à8¸ Ð ¸ Ð àfailure€to€prepare€adequately€for€trial;€€Ð¶® xx ÐÌà ` àà8 ¸ à5.à8¸ Ð ¸ Ð àfailure€to€review€the€petitionerððs€preliminaryÐ ‚z  Ðhearing€before€trial;Ðh`xx ÐÌà ` àà8 ¸ à6.à8¸ Ð ¸ Ð àfailure€to€advise€and€prepare€the€petitionerÐ 4, Ðsufficiently€regarding€his€testimony;€Ðxx ÐÌà ` àà8 ¸ à7.à8¸ Ð ¸ Ð àfailure€to€advise€the€petitioner€properly€of€theÐ æÞ Ðevidence€against€him;€€ÐÌÄxx Ðà ` àÌà ` àà ¸ à8.à8  àfailure€to€contest€a€fatally€defective€indictment;€Ð˜xx ÐÌà ` àà8 ¸ à9.à8¸ Ð ¸ Ð àfailure€to€advise€the€petitioner€of€medicalÐ d\ Ðevidence€to€be€presented€by€the€state€untilÐ JB Ðimmediately€before€trial,€denying€him€theÐ 0 ( Ðopportunity€to€prepare€for€this€testimony;€€Ð!xx ÐÌà ` àà8 ¸ à10.à8¸ Ð ¸ Ð àfailure€to€cross„examine€the€victim€properly€inÐ â"Ú Ðorder€to€present€testimony€by€David€Meador€ofÐ È#À  Ðthe€victimððs€prior€inconsistent€statement;€€Ð®$¦!xx ÐÌà ` àà8 ¸ à11.à8¸ Ð ¸ Ð àfailure€to€make€an€offer€of€proof€to€preserveÐ z&r# ÐDavid€Meadorððs€testimony€for€the€appellateÐ `'X $ Ðprocess;€ÐF(>!%xx ÐÌà ` àà8 ¸ à12.à8¸ Ð ¸ Ð àfailure€to€object€to€damaging€testimony€by€stateððsÐ * #' Ðwitness€Dr.€Elizabeth€LaRoche;€and€€Ðø*ð#(xx ÐÌà ` àà8 ¸ à13.à8¸ Ð ¸ Ð àfailure€to€present€evidence€concerning€scientificÐ Ä,¼%* Ðlaboratory€results.Ъ-¢&+xx ÐÌÓÓÌà@µµ$Dàò òPOST„CONVICTION€HEARINGó óˆÐ B1:*/ ÐÓ  Óà ` àà ¸ àThe€post„conviction€court€heard€testimony€from€the€petitioner,€theÐ 3,1 Ðpetitionerððs€trial€attorney,€and€David€Meador,€an€ambulance€attendant.€€Ð Ú4Ò-3 ÐÐ ¦6ž/5 Їà@OO"Dàò òA.€€Testimony€of€Petitioneró óˆÐ  Ðà ` àThe€petitioner€testified€at€the€post„conviction€evidentiary€hearing€that€when€heÐ ÔÌ Ðfirst€met€his€trial€attorney,€who€was€an€assistant€public€defender,€in€early€August€1990,Ð   ˜ Ðhe€suffered€from€a€disability€to€his€right€arm,€the€result€of€a€lightning€strike€he€receivedÐ l d Ðin€July€just€before€the€alleged€rape.€€The€medication€that€the€petitioner€took€for€theÐ 80 Ðdisability€affected€his€reaction€time€and€his€strength,€but€he€was€unsure€whetherÐ ü  Ðcounsel€was€aware€of€this€fact.€€Ð ÐÈ  ÐÌà ` àThe€petitioner€testified€that€his€attorney€neither€showed€him€the€indictment€norÐ h` Ðapprised€him€of€the€elements€and€culpable€mental€state€for€aggravated€rape.€€He€alsoÐ 4, Ðsaid€that€she€never€reviewed€the€preliminary€hearing€transcript€or€any€discoveryÐ ø Ðmaterials€with€him.€€The€petitioner€said€he€was€unaware€of€the€victimððs€rape€kit€resultsÐ ÌÄ Ðand€the€extent€of€her€injuries€until€trial.€€He€said€his€attorney€never€reviewed€the€victimððsÐ ˜ Ðmedical€records€with€him.€€He€said€she€did€interview€three€witnesses€named€by€theÐ d\ Ðpetitioner,€as€well€as€Officer€Ruch€and€the€petitionerððs€physician.€€However,€theÐ 0 ( Ðpetitioner€stated€she€did€not€share€the€substance€of€those€conversations€with€him.Ð ü!ô ÐÌà ` àThe€petitioner€did€not€recall€being€told€of€any€plea€offer€from€the€state,€althoughÐ ”%Œ" Ðhe€acknowledged€that€because€he€maintained€his€innocence,€no€real€discussion€aboutÐ `'X $ Ða€plea€occurred.€€He€also€acknowledged€a€desire€to€tell€the€jury€ð ð[his]€side€of€the€story.ðð€€Ð ,)$"& ÐThe€initial€decision€for€the€petitioner€to€testify€at€trial€was€made€about€one€week€beforeÐ ø*ð#( Ðthe€trial.€€The€attorney€conducted€a€practice€session€in€which€she€briefly€questioned€theÐ Ä,¼%* Ðpetitioner.€€Nevertheless,€petitioner€stated€that€he€was€not€prepared€for€the€districtÐ .ˆ', Ðattorneyððs€cross„examination€which€resulted€in€damaging€testimony.€€Ð \0T). ÐÌà ` àIn€spite€of€the€above,€the€petitioner€said€he€was€not€surprised€by€the€evidence€atÐ ô3ì,2 Ðtrial€and€expected€a€not€guilty€verdict.€€He€said€his€attorney€told€him€they€had€a€ð ðprettyÐ À5¸.4 Ðgood€case,ðð€and€he€said€he€thought€he€would€be€acquitted.€€The€petitioner€claimed€thatÐ Œ7„06 Ðwhen€the€victim€said€ð ðdonððt€stop,ðð€he€took€that€to€mean€she€did€not€want€him€to€stop,Ð  Ðand€so€he€continued.€€He€maintained€his€innocence€and€claimed€that€the€intercourseÐ ÔÌ Ðbegan€consensually,€that€he€did€not€mean€to€hurt€the€victim,€and€that€he€just€made€aÐ   ˜ Ðmistake.Ð l d ÐÌà@ŒŒ!Dàò òB.€€Testimony€of€David€Meadoró óˆÐ ü  Ðà ` àDavid€Meador€testified€at€the€post„conviction€evidentiary€hearing€that€on€theÐ ÐÈ  Ðnight€of€the€aggravated€rape,€he€worked€for€Rutherford€County€Emergency€MedicalÐ œ”  ÐServices.€€Meador€said€he€assisted€the€victim,€who€gave€a€statement€about€whatÐ h` Ðhappened.€€Meador€read€the€following€pertinent€portion€of€his€report€into€the€record:€Ð 4, ÐÓÓÓ  Óà8 ` àà8¸ ` (#` (#àð ð.€.€.€during€intercourse€she€became€afraid€he€was€going€to€hurtÐ ø Ðher€„„„afraid€he€was€going€to€hurt€her€because€he€kept€puttingÐ æÞ Ðhis€hand€over€her€mouth€and€telling€her€to€shut€up.€€He€wasÐ ÌÄ Ðalso€telling€her€to€shut€up€prior€to€the€intercourse.ððвª¸ Ð ¸ Ð  ÐÌÓÓÓ  ÓMeador€did€not€remember€the€victim€either€expressing€that€she€felt€fear€prior€to€the€startÐ ~v Ðof€intercourse€or€saying€anything€about€rape,€nor€did€she€say€that€the€intercourse€wasÐ JB Ðconsensual.€à ¸ àMeador€said€he€met€with€the€petitionerððs€attorney€before€the€trial.€Ð ! ÐAlthough€unable€to€remember€exactly€what€he€told€her€at€that€time,€he€speculated€thatÐ â"Ú Ðthey€reviewed€and€discussed€the€contents€of€his€report.€Ð ®$¦! ÐÌà@’’ Dàò òC.€€Testimony€of€Trial€Attorneyó óˆà x àÐ F(>!% Ðà ` àThe€petitionerððs€attorney€conducted€an€initial€interview€with€the€petitioner€whichÐ * #' Ðlasted€thirty€minutes€to€one€hour.€€She€said€she€heard€the€petitionerððs€version€of€theÐ Þ+Ö$) Ðevents€and€discussed€the€charges€against€him.€€She€said€the€petitioner€cooperated€inÐ ª-¢&+ Ðthe€preparation€of€his€case,€although€he€was€arrested€several€times€between€herÐ v/n(- Ðappointment€and€the€start€of€trial.Ð B1:*/ ÐÌà ` àThe€attorney€said€she€spoke€with€the€convenience€store€clerk€within€four€days€ofÐ Ú4Ò-3 Ðher€original€appointment.€€She€said€she€participated€in€the€preliminary€hearing€onÐ ¦6ž/5 ÐAugust€10,€1990.€€She€stated€that€she€later€received€information€about€another€possibleÐ r8j17 Ðwitness€and€tried€to€get€information€from€the€petitionerððs€doctor€regarding€theÐ  Ðpetitionerððs€injury€and€his€inability€to€force€someone€to€have€sex€with€him.€€Ð ÔÌ ÐÌà ` àThe€attorney€testified€that€in€the€course€of€her€pre„trial€investigation,€she€securedÐ l d Ða€preliminary€hearing€transcript€to€use€in€preparing€for€her€cross„examination€of€theÐ 80 Ðvictim.€€She€said€she€also€went€to€the€scene€of€the€crime.€€Her€case€log€reflects€that€theÐ ü  Ðpetitioner€appeared€at€his€arraignment,€which€confirmed€to€her€that€he€knew€theÐ ÐÈ  Ðcharges€against€him.€€She€said€that€a€copy€of€the€indictment€would€have€been€madeÐ œ”  Ðavailable€to€the€petitioner€at€that€time.€Ð h` ÐÌà ` àThe€attorney€said€she€interviewed€LaVergne€police€officers€Spicer€and€RuchÐ ø Ðabout€their€involvement€with€the€petitioner€on€the€night€of€the€rape.€€She€said€she€alsoÐ ÌÄ Ðcontacted€several€people€mentioned€by€the€petitioner€as€witnesses€to€the€lightningÐ ˜ Ðstrike€and€injury€he€suffered€just€days€before€the€rape.Ð d\ ÐÌà ` àThe€attorney€testified€that€the€petitioner€visited€her€office€regularly.€€Although€notÐ ü!ô Ðevery€meeting€was€an€interview,€she€said€she€did€advise€him€about€the€aggravated€rapeÐ È#À  Ðcharge.€€Before€the€preliminary€hearing,€she€said€she€explained€the€charge,€and€sheÐ ”%Œ" Ðtestified€that€she€would€have€explained€the€elements€of€the€crime.€€She€said€that€sheÐ `'X $ Ðexplained€the€defense€of€consent€and€that€the€petitioner€seemed€to€understand€theirÐ ,)$"& Ðdiscussions.€€Ð ø*ð#( ÐÌà ` àThe€attorney€said€she€discussed€the€option€of€a€plea€agreement€with€theÐ .ˆ', Ðpetitioner,€but€the€petitioner€resisted€and€maintained€that€he€did€not€rape€the€victim.Ð \0T). ÐAlthough€her€case€log€reflected€an€offer€to€allow€the€petitioner€to€plead€guilty€to€simpleÐ (2 +0 Ðrape,€she€said€she€did€not€recall€receiving€or€discussing€any€specific€plea€offer€with€theÐ ô3ì,2 Ðâ âpetitioner.€€€However,€she€stated€that€the€office€policy€was€to€convey€any€and€allÐ À5¸.4 Ðsettlement€offers€and€that€there€was€no€reason€to€believe€that€the€policy€was€notÐ  Ðfollowed€in€this€case.€Ð ÔÌ Ðâ âÌà ` àThe€attorney€testified€that€she€reviewed€the€victimððs€medical€records€prior€to€trial.€Ð l d ÐBecause€she€understood€them,€she€said€she€felt€no€need€to€consult€a€medical€expert€orÐ 80 Ðmedical€library€for€clarification€of€their€import.€€She€said€the€records€revealed€substantialÐ ü  Ðinjuries€to€the€victim.€€The€attorney€did€not€remember€reviewing€the€medical€recordsÐ ÐÈ  Ðwith€the€petitioner€but€did€advise€him€of€the€serious€nature€of€the€victimððs€injuries.€Ð œ”  ÐÌà ` àThe€attorney€testified€that€the€state€did€comply€with€the€courtððs€discovery€order,Ð 4, Ðalthough€it€was€still€providing€discovery€four€days€before€trial.€€The€attorney€said€sheÐ ø Ðreviewed€the€stateððs€file€pursuant€to€its€open„file€policy.€€She€said€the€state€informed€herÐ ÌÄ Ðshortly€before€trial€that€Dr.€Sharon€Piper€would€be€a€witness.€€She€said€she€interviewedÐ ˜ ÐDr.€Piper€the€next€day,€and€Dr.€Piper€expressed€her€medical€opinion€that€the€victimððsÐ d\ Ðinjuries€were€not€the€result€of€consensual€sex.€€The€attorney€said€she€did€not€seekÐ 0 ( Ðanother€medical€professional€to€assess€the€opinion,€nor€did€she€pursue€other€possibleÐ ü!ô Ðcauses€of€the€victimððs€injuries.€€€€Ð È#À  ÐÌà ` àThe€attorney€also€recalled€that€Officer€Ruch€testified€favorably€for€the€petitionerÐ `'X $ Ðat€trial.€€She€said€he€testified€that€the€victim€told€him€that€the€petitioner€did€not€force€herÐ ,)$"& Ðinto€the€kissing€and€oral€intercourse.€€She€said€this€corroborated€the€petitionerððs€versionÐ ø*ð#( Ðthat€the€sexual€intercourse€was€consensual.€€€Ð Ä,¼%* ÐÌà ` àThe€attorney€said€that€Dr.€Piper€testified€that€in€her€medical€opinion,€the€victimððsÐ \0T). Ðinjuries€could€only€have€been€caused€by€force.€€The€attorney€said€she€did€not€cross„Ð (2 +0 Ðexamine€Dr.€Piper€regarding€this€aspect€of€her€testimony€because€the€petitioner€did€notÐ ô3ì,2 Ðcontest€the€existence€of€the€victimððs€injuries.€€She€said€that€Dr.€Elizabeth€LaRocheÐ À5¸.4 Ðtestified€in€rebuttal€for€the€state€that€a€speculum€could€not€cause€the€injuries€suffered€byÐ Œ7„06 Ðthe€victim.€€The€attorney€said€she€did€not€object€to€the€testimony€and€chose€not€toÐ  Ðcross„examine€Dr.€LaRoche.€€She€said€that€she€did€not€want€to€risk€Dr.€LaRocheÐ ÔÌ Ðtestifying€that€the€petitioner€could€have€caused€the€injuries.€€Ð   ˜ ÐÌà ` àThe€attorney€said€that€she€and€the€petitioner€discussed€his€decision€to€take€theÐ 80 Ðstand€at€trial.€€She€said€that€in€preparation,€they€rehearsed€his€testimony€with€herÐ ü  Ðplaying€the€role€of€prosecutor.€€She€also€related€that€a€week€before€trial,€the€DistrictÐ ÐÈ  ÐPublic€Defender,€Gerald€Melton,€put€the€petitioner€through€a€ð ðgruelingðð€cross„Ð œ”  Ðexamination.Ð h` Ðà ` àÌà ` àThe€attorney€testified€that€the€petitioner€made€the€final€decision€to€testify€duringÐ ø Ðthe€trial.€€She€said€that€the€victimððs€testimony€was€very€sympathetic€and€effective€andÐ ÌÄ Ðthat€she€felt€€the€jury€wanted€to€hear€from€the€petitioner.€€She€said€the€petitioner€hadÐ ˜ Ðdone€well€in€rehearsal,€and€she€hoped€he€would€come€across€well€to€the€jury.€€She€saidÐ d\ Ðshe€did€not€discourage€the€petitioner€from€testifying,€but€the€choice€ultimately€remainedÐ 0 ( Ðthe€petitionerððs€to€make.€Ð ü!ô ÐÌà ` àAccording€to€the€attorney,€the€petitioner€had€three€defenses€available€to€him:Ð ”%Œ" Ðalibi,€consent,€and€mistake.€€She€said€that€alibi€was€not€an€option€under€the€facts€of€thisÐ `'X $ Ðcase.€€Although€she€said€she€felt€that€mistake€can€be€a€legitimate€defense,€she€said€sheÐ ,)$"& Ðwas€unaware€of€any€case€in€which€it€was€used€successfully.€€She€said€she€decided€notÐ ø*ð#( Ðto€assert€it€and€did€not€request€a€jury€instruction.€€Instead,€she€said€she€asserted€theÐ Ä,¼%* Ðdefense€of€consent.Ð .ˆ', ÐÌà ` àBased€on€her€pre„trial€meeting€with€David€Meador,€the€attorney€believed€thatÐ (2 +0 ÐMeador€felt€the€intercourse€between€the€petitioner€and€the€victim€was€consensual.€€SheÐ ô3ì,2 Ðsaid€the€district€attorney€successfully€objected€to€Meadorððs€testimony€about€the€victimððsÐ À5¸.4 Ðstatement€based€upon€the€requirement€that€a€witness€first€be€given€an€opportunity€toÐ Œ7„06 Ðexplain€a€prior€inconsistent€statement.€€She€said€she€made€a€conscious€decision€not€toÐ  Ðcross„examine€the€victim€regarding€her€alleged€statement€to€Meador€that€theÐ ÔÌ Ðintercourse€was€consensual.€€She€said€the€state€rule€regarding€impeachment€by€use€ofÐ   ˜ Ða€prior€inconsistent€statement€was€in€question,€and€the€federal€rule€would€have€requiredÐ l d Ðthe€state€to€recall€the€victim€to€explain€her€statement.€€She€admitted€that€she€did€notÐ 80 Ðmake€an€offer€of€proof.Ð ü  ÐÌà ` àNevertheless,€the€attorney€said€she€was€prepared€for€trial.€€She€said€sheÐ œ”  Ðpresented€the€defense€of€consent€as€planned.€€She€also€felt€that€the€petitioner€wasÐ h` Ðprepared€to€go€to€trial€and€to€assist€in€his€defense.€€She€said€there€were€no€realÐ 4, Ðsurprises€regarding€the€evidence€presented€other€than€the€judgeððs€evidentiary€rulingÐ ø Ðagainst€her€with€regard€to€Meadorððs€testimony.€€The€attorney€felt€that,€overall,€sheÐ ÌÄ Ðeffectively€represented€the€petitioner.€€Ð ˜ ÐÌà@FF$Dàò òTRIAL€COURTððS€FINDINGSó óˆÐ 0 ( Ðà ` àThe€trial€court€found€that€the€attorney€rendered€competent,€effectiveÐ ü!ô Ðrepresentation.€€€In€response€to€the€petitionerððs€claim€that€the€case€was€insufficientlyÐ È#À  Ðinvestigated,€the€court€found€otherwise.€€The€court€found€that€the€attorney€andÐ ”%Œ" Ðmembers€of€the€public€defenderððs€office€had€numerous€meetings€with€the€petitionerÐ `'X $ Ðduring€which€the€case€was€discussed€to€everyoneððs€apparent€satisfaction.€€It€found€thatÐ ,)$"& Ðthe€attorney€reviewed€the€medical€evidence€against€the€petitioner€and€that€she€did€aÐ ø*ð#( Ðgood€job€cross„examining€the€stateððs€witnesses.€€The€trial€court€noted€that€this€case€wasÐ Ä,¼%* Ðessentially€a€credibility€contest€between€the€petitioner€and€the€victim.€€The€jury€chose€toÐ .ˆ', Ðbelieve€the€victim.€€The€trial€court€concluded€that€the€attorney€presented€a€defenseÐ \0T). Ðwithin€the€required€range€of€competence.Ð (2 +0 ÐÌÌÐ Œ7„06 Ðà@ÆÆ&Dàò òSTANDARD€OF€REVIEWó óˆÐ  Ðà ` àIn€a€post„conviction€case,€the€burden€is€on€the€petitioner€to€prove€his€grounds€forÐ ÔÌ Ðrelief€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„210(f).€€Under€theÐ   ˜ ÐSixth€Amendment,€when€a€claim€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€is€made,€theÐ l d Ðburden€is€upon€the€petitioner€to€show€(1)€that€counsel's€performance€was€deficient€andÐ 80 Ð(2)€that€the€deficiency€was€prejudicial€in€terms€of€rendering€a€reasonable€probability€thatÐ ü  Ðthe€result€of€the€trial€was€unreliable€or€the€proceedings€fundamentally€unfair.€€òòStricklandÐ ÐÈ  Ðv.€Washingtonóó,€466€U.S.€668,€687,€104€S.€Ct.€2052,€2064€(1984);€òòseeóó€òòLockhart€v.Ð œ”  ÐFretwellóó,€506€U.S.€364,€369„72,€113€S.€Ct.€838,€842„44€(1993).€€The€òòStricklandóó€standardÐ h` Ðhas€been€applied,€as€well,€to€the€right€to€counsel€under€Article€I,€Section€9€of€theÐ 4, ÐTennessee€Constitution.€€òòState€v.€Melsonóó,€772€S.W.2d€417,€419€n.2€(Tenn.€1989).€€€Ð ø ÐÌà ` àIn€òòBaxter€v.€Roseóó,€523€S.W.2d€930,€936€(Tenn.€1975),€our€supreme€courtÐ ˜ Ðdecided€that€attorneys€should€be€held€to€the€general€standard€of€whether€the€servicesÐ d\ Ðrendered€were€within€the€range€of€competence€demanded€of€attorneys€in€criminalÐ 0 ( Ðcases.€€Further,€the€court€stated€that€the€range€of€competence€was€to€be€measured€byÐ ü!ô Ðthe€duties€and€criteria€set€forth€in€òòBeasley€v.€United€Statesóó,€491€F.2d€687,€696€(6th€Cir.Ð È#À  Ð1974)€and€òòUnited€States€v.€DeCosteróó,€487€F.2d€1197,€1202„04€(D.C.€Cir.€1973).€€Also,Ð ”%Œ" Ðin€reviewing€counsel's€conduct,€a€"fair€assessment€of€attorney€performance€requiresÐ `'X $ Ðthat€every€effort€be€made€to€eliminate€the€distorting€effects€of€hindsight,€to€reconstructÐ ,)$"& Ðthe€circumstances€of€counsel's€challenged€conduct,€and€to€evaluate€the€conduct€fromÐ ø*ð#( Ðcounsel's€perspective€at€the€time."€€òòStricklandóó,€466€U.S.€at€689,€104€S.€Ct.€at€2065;€òòseeóóÐ Ä,¼%* ÐòòHellard€v.€Stateóó,€629€S.W.2d€4,€9€(Tenn.€1982)€(counsel's€conduct€will€not€be€measuredÐ .ˆ', Ðby€"20„20€hindsight").€€Thus,€the€fact€that€a€particular€strategy€or€tactic€failed€or€evenÐ \0T). Ðhurt€the€defense€does€not,€alone,€support€a€claim€of€ineffective€assistance.€€DeferenceÐ (2 +0 Ðis€made€to€trial€strategy€or€tactical€choices€if€they€are€informed€ones€based€uponÐ ô3ì,2 Ðadequate€preparation.€€òòSeeóó€òòHellardóó,€629€S.W.2d€at€9;€òòDeCosteróó,€487€F.2d€at€1201.€€Ð À5¸.4 ÐÐ Œ7„06 Ðà ` àAlso,€we€note€that€the€approach€to€the€issue€of€the€ineffective€assistance€ofÐ  Ðcounsel€does€not€have€to€start€with€an€analysis€of€an€attorney's€conduct.€€If€prejudice€isÐ ÔÌ Ðnot€shown,€we€need€not€seek€to€determine€the€validity€of€the€allegations€about€deficientÐ   ˜ Ðperformance.€€òòStricklandóó,€466€U.S.€at€697,€104€S.€Ct.€at€2069.€€Ð l d ÐÌà ` àOn€appeal,€we€are€bound€by€the€trial€courtððs€findings€unless€we€conclude€that€theÐ ü  Ðevidence€preponderates€against€those€findings.€€In€this€respect,€we€may€not€reweigh€orÐ ÐÈ  Ðreevaluate€the€evidence€or€substitute€our€inferences€for€those€drawn€by€the€trial€court.€Ð œ”  ÐòòSeeóó€òòHenley€v.€Stateóó,€960€S.W.2d€572,€578„79€(1997);€òòBlackóó,€794€S.W.2d€at€755.€Ð h` ÐQuestions€concerning€the€credibility€of€witnesses€and€the€weight€and€value€to€be€givenÐ 4, Ðto€their€testimony€are€resolved€by€the€trial€court.€€òòHenleyóó,€960€S.W.2d€at€579;€òòBlackóó,€794Ð ø ÐS.W.2d€at€755.€€The€petitioner€has€the€burden€on€appeal€of€illustrating€how€theÐ ÌÄ Ðevidence€preponderates€against€the€judgment€entered.€€òòId.óó€Ð ˜ Ðà ` àÌà@JJ+Dàò òANALYSISó óˆÐ 0 ( Ðà ` à1.à ¸ àAs€for€the€alleged€failure€to€investigate€the€case€sufficiently,€the€trial€courtÐ ü!ô Ðfound€that€the€attorney€adequately€investigated€the€case.€€The€evidence€does€notÐ È#À  Ðpreponderate€against€this€finding.€€Furthermore,€the€petitioner€has€failed€to€establishÐ ”%Œ" Ðthat€further€investigation€would€have€benefited€his€defense.€€The€petitioner€has€notÐ `'X $ Ðshown€€deficiency€or€prejudice.Ð ,)$"& ÐÌà ` à2.à ¸ àAs€for€the€alleged€failure€to€present€a€defense€within€the€required€range€ofÐ Ä,¼%* Ðcompetence,€the€trial€court€specifically€found€that€the€defense€was€competent.€€TheÐ .ˆ', Ðrecord€does€not€preponderate€against€this€finding.€€The€attorneyððs€failure€to€present€theÐ \0T). Ðdefense€of€mistake€was€a€tactical€decision€which€this€court€may€not€second„guess.€€TheÐ (2 +0 Ðpetitioner€has€not€shown€deficiency.€€Ð ô3ì,2 Ðâ âÐ À5¸.4 Ðà ` à3.à ¸ àAs€for€the€alleged€failure€to€cross„examine€the€stateððs€witnesses€properly,Ð  Ðâ âthe€trial€court€specifically€found€that€the€attorney€did€a€good€job€in€her€cross„Ð ÔÌ Ðexamination.€€The€record€does€not€preponderate€against€this€finding.€€The€petitioner€hasÐ   ˜ Ðnot€shown€deficiency.Ð l d ÐÌà ` à4.à ¸ àAs€for€the€alleged€failure€to€prepare€adequately€for€trial,€the€attorneyððsÐ ü  Ðcase€log€reflects€ample€preparation.€€The€petitioner€has€demonstrated€neither€anyÐ ÐÈ  Ðdeficiency€on€her€part€nor€that€additional€preparation€would€have€resulted€in€a€differentÐ œ”  Ðoutcome.€€The€petitioner€has€failed€to€show€prejudice.Ð h` ÐÌà ` à5.à ¸ àAs€for€the€alleged€failure€to€review€the€petitionerððs€preliminary€hearingÐ ø Ðtestimony€prior€to€trial,€the€attorney€testified€that€she€had€a€transcript€made€from€whichÐ ÌÄ Ðto€prepare€for€the€victimððs€cross„examination.€€The€petitioner€has€failed€to€prove€that€hisÐ ˜ Ðattorney€did€not€review€the€transcript,€nor€does€the€petitioner€establish€that€this€wouldÐ d\ Ðhave€affected€the€trialððs€outcome.€€The€petitioner€has€not€made€a€showing€of€deficiencyÐ 0 ( Ðor€prejudice.Ð ü!ô ÐÌà ` à6.à ¸ àAs€for€the€alleged€failure€to€advise€and€prepare€the€petitioner€sufficientlyÐ ”%Œ" Ðfor€his€testimony€at€trial,€the€attorney€testified€that€they€discussed€this€issue.€€SheÐ `'X $ Ðtestified€that€they€rehearsed€the€petitionerððs€testimony€and€that€the€petitioner€made€theÐ ,)$"& Ðfinal€choice€during€the€trial€to€testify.€€The€petitioner€has€failed€to€show€any€deficiency€byÐ ø*ð#( Ðcounsel€or€prejudice.€€Ð Ä,¼%* ÐÌà ` à7.à ¸ àAs€for€the€alleged€failure€to€advise€petitioner€adequately€of€the€evidenceÐ \0T). Ðagainst€him,€the€attorney€testified€that€the€petitioner€was€advised€of,€and€understood,Ð (2 +0 Ðthe€evidence€against€him.€€The€petitioner€has€failed€to€prove€otherwise€or€to€showÐ ô3ì,2 Ðdeficiency€or€prejudice.€Ð À5¸.4 ÐÐ Œ7„06 Ðà ` à8.à ¸ àAs€for€the€failure€to€contest€the€allegedly€ð ðfatally€defectiveðð€indictment,€theÐ  Ðpetitioner€makes€no€reference€to€the€record€and€fails€to€cite€any€authority.€€This€issue€isÐ ÔÌ Ðwaived.€€T.R.A.P.€27(a)(7);€Tenn.€Ct.€Crim.€App.€R.€10(b).€€We€also€note€that€this€issueÐ   ˜ Ðhas€been€previously€determined€against€the€petitioner€in€a€prior€habeas€corpus€appeal.€Ð l d ÐòòSeeóó€òòDonald€Wayne€Holt€v.€Howard€Carlton€&€Stateóó,€No.€03C01„9702„CR„00059,Ð 80 ÐJohnson€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€Dec.€23,€1997).Ð ü  ÐÌà ` à9.à ¸ àAs€for€the€alleged€failure€to€advise€the€petitioner€in€a€timely€manner€ofÐ œ”  Ðmedical€evidence€to€be€presented€at€trial,€trial€counsel€testified€otherwise.€€Further,€theÐ h` Ðpetitioner€has€failed€to€show€that€any€benefit€could€have€been€derived€from€additionalÐ 4, Ðpreparation€or€that€the€outcome€would€have€been€different.€€The€petitioner€has€failed€toÐ ø Ðshow€deficiency€or€prejudice.Ð ÌÄ ÐÌà ` à10.à ¸ àAs€for€the€failure€to€cross„examine€the€victim€concerning€her€allegedÐ d\ Ðstatement€to€David€Meador,€we€again€see€no€deficiency.€€At€the€time€of€the€trial,€noÐ 0 ( Ðcase€law€existed€that€interpreted€whether€Rule€613(b),€Tenn.€R.€Evid.,€required€that€theÐ ü!ô Ðwitness€be€given€the€opportunity€to€admit,€explain€or€deny€a€prior€inconsistent€statementÐ È#À  Ðas€a€prerequisite€to€proving€the€inconsistent€statement€by€extrinsic€evidence.€€We€noteÐ ”%Œ" Ðthat€the€identical€Rule€613(b),€Fed.€R.€Evid.,€was€contemplated€to€do€away€with€theÐ `'X $ Ðtraditional€foundation€requirement€of€confronting€the€impeached€witness€with€the€priorÐ ,)$"& Ðinconsistent€statement€during€cross„examination.€€òòSeeóó€òòNotes€of€Advisory€Committee€onÐ ø*ð#( ÐProposed€Rulesóó,€Fed.€R.€Evid.€613.€€In€fact,€in€1996,€this€court€concluded€that€it€wasÐ Ä,¼%* Ðunnecessary€to€confront€the€witness€with€a€statement€before€the€statement€wasÐ .ˆ', Ðdeclared€admissible.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Henry€Lee€Martinóó,€No.€01C01„9411„CR„00397,Ð \0T). ÐDavidson€County€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€May€24,€1996).€€However,€the€Tennessee€SupremeÐ (2 +0 ÐCourt€refused€to€adopt€this€courtððs€position,€holding€that€extrinsic€evidence€of€anÐ ô3ì,2 Ðinconsistent€statement€is€inadmissible€until€the€witness€either€denies€or€equivocates€asÐ À5¸.4 Ðto€having€made€the€prior€inconsistent€statement.€€òòState€v.€Martinóó,€964€S.W.2d€564,€567Ð Œ7„06 Ð(Tenn.€1998).€€Defense€counselððs€actions€cannot€be€evaluated€from€hindsight€but€mustÐ  Ðbe€evaluated€from€counselððs€perspective€at€the€time€of€the€conduct.€€òòStricklandóó,€466Ð ÔÌ ÐU.S.€at€689,€104€S.€Ct.€at€2065.€€The€attorneyððs€reliance€upon€most€federal€courtsððÐ   ˜ Ðinterpretation€of€the€same€language€as€found€in€Rule€613(b),€Tenn.€R.€Evid.,€wasÐ l d Ðreasonable€under€the€circumstances.€€We€conclude€that€the€attorneyððs€performanceÐ 80 Ðwas€not€deficient.Ð ü  ÐÌà ` àIn€any€event,€we€note€that€Officer€Ruchððs€testimony€regarding€the€victimððsÐ œ”  Ðstatements€to€him€also€impeached€the€victimððs€testimony.€€Ironically,€although€the€stateÐ h` Ðobjected€to€Officer€Ruch€testifying€about€the€victimððs€statement€because€the€defendantÐ 4, Ðhad€not€cross„examined€the€victim€about€the€statement,€the€trial€court€admitted€theÐ ø Ðevidence.€€Thus,€the€petitioner€did€get€the€benefit€of€impeaching€evidence€on€theÐ ÌÄ Ðconsent€issue.Ð ˜ ÐÌà ` à11.à ¸ àAs€for€the€failure€of€counsel€to€make€an€offer€of€proof€to€preserve€DavidÐ 0 ( ÐMeadorððs€testimony,€the€petitioner€has€not€shown€that€the€offer€of€proof€would€haveÐ ü!ô Ðaffected€the€outcome€of€the€direct€appeal.€€On€direct€appeal,€this€court€decided€thisÐ È#À  Ðissue€on€its€merits€and€simply€noted€the€lack€of€an€offer€of€proof€as€an€alternative€basis.€Ð ”%Œ" ÐòòSeeóó€òòDonald€Wayne€Holtóó,€slip.€op.€at€8.€€òòÐ `'X $ ÐóóÌà ` à12.à ¸ àThe€failure€to€object€to€the€testimony€of€Dr.€Elizabeth€LaRoche€was€aÐ ø*ð#( Ðtactical€decision.€€We€may€not€second€guess€this€decision.€€The€petitioner€has€notÐ Ä,¼%* Ðshown€deficiency€or€prejudice.Ð .ˆ', ÐÌà ` à13.à ¸ àAs€for€the€failure€to€present€evidence€concerning€scientific€laboratoryÐ (2 +0 Ðresults,€the€petitioner€makes€no€reference€to€the€record€and€fails€to€cite€any€authority.€Ð ô3ì,2 ÐThis€issue€is€waived.€€T.R.A.P.€27(a)(7);€Tenn.€Ct.€Crim.€App.€R.€10(b).€€Furthermore,Ð À5¸.4 Ðthe€petitioner€has€failed€to€show€prejudice.€Ð Œ7„06 Їà ` àThe€trial€courtððs€findings€of€fact€are€conclusive€unless€the€evidenceÐ  Ðpreponderates€otherwise.€€The€evidence€does€not€preponderate€against€the€findings€ofÐ ÔÌ Ðthe€trial€court.€€We,€therefore,€conclude€that€the€petitioner€has€failed€to€establish€theÐ   ˜ Ðineffective€assistance€of€counsel.ò òÐ l d ÐÌà@¤¤*DàCONCLUSIONó óˆÐ ü  Ðà ` àBased€upon€the€foregoing€and€the€record€as€a€whole,€we€affirm€the€judgment€ofÐ ÐÈ  Ðthe€trial€court.Ð œ”  Ðà ` àÌÓÓà€  6€%à__________________________ˆÐ 4, Ðà€HH-€%àJoseph€M.€Tipton,€Judge€€€€€€€€€€€€ˆÐ  ÐÌÌÌò òCONCUR:ó óÐ ²ª ÐÌÌ__________________________Ð d\ ÐJoe€G.€Riley,€JudgeÐ JB ÐÌÌ_________________________€€€€€€Ð ü!ô ÐAlan€E.€Glenn,€Judge