ÿWPC5 6# U: %I 0(Ow@w4·ËÚ 0”â 0Dv 0Jº 0T 0DXU@œeÜÆÝ 0^£ 0h AQi 0Dº 0rþ 0|p 0†ì Br 0 1u 0d” 0@ø D38 D/k Bš U *· B)á DC AMM Èš bqsv~ävÓb˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLHÎ, øð AZ‹"Arial RegularX($¡¡  D  D  DÓ€äzz!àâãÃçÇëéÉèêí3|x(D(2´¤$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ°ÒÒX°ÒÓ  Óà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý É¸·`(ZapfCalligr BTTTƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 52, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô$(Cþÿ<< Cÿÿ($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô d2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò'ÿÿdxd**'÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d....7Border 1dd$/Cþÿ << Gÿÿ ¾Ý ƒ!ÝÔ€-ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ"ÝÝ  Ýò òÔ€-ÔÓ  ÓÔ eee ÔFILEDÔ€-XÔó óÌò òÔ€-¼ÔÔ"USú ú, úÔÔ ƒ ÔÔ!  Ôó óÔ€-XÔÌÌò òCecil€Crowson,€Jr.Ô€Ôó óÔ  ÔÌÔ€ÂÔÔ€-ÔÔ eee Ôò òAppellate€Court€Clerkó óÔ  ÔÔ€ÔÔ€XÔ Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€-ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÓ  Óà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThis€offense€is€now€known€as€aggravated€burglary.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„14„403.Ì gÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€-ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÓ  Óà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€State€of€Tennessee€made€the€appellant€a€reasonable€offer€to€settle€theseÏcases.€€He€rejected€the€offer€and€made€a€counter€offer€to€the€state.€€The€state€rejectedÏhis€offer.€€ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$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 ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€-ÔÝ  Ý›Ò  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ X ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓ  ÓÑ\R AØ'\ÑœÞ ÞÌIN›€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEE̜ـÙßR€01/A1-j|ÿ\â `€€@ÿRß›ÌAT€JACKSONÌÌSEPTEMBER€1996€SESSIONÌÌÌÌÌÓ  ÓDICKIE€L.€HOPKINS,€à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àà àAPPELLANT,à àà à)à àNo.€02„C„01„9509„CC„00271Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àFayette€CountyÌv.à àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àJon€Kerry€Blackwood,€JudgeÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà àà à)à à(Post„Conviction€Relief)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àAPPELLEE.€à àà àà à)ÌÌÌÌÌÌFOR€THE€APPELLANT:à àà àà àà àFOR€THE€APPELLEE:ÌÌWilliam€S.€Rheaà àà àà àà àà àCharles€W.€BursonÌAttorney€at€Lawà àà àà àà àà àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÌP.€O.€Box€819à àà àà àà àà à500€Charlotte€AvenueÌSomerville,€TN€38068à àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0497ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àWilliam€D.€BridgersÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àElizabeth€T.€RiceÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à302€Market€StreetÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àSomerville,€TN€38068ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àChristopher€S.€MashburnÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à302€Market€StreetÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àSomerville,€TN€38068ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:_________________________________ÌÌÌAFFIRMED€IN€PART,€REVERSED€IN€PART,€ÌAND€REMANDED€FOR€A€NEW€SENTENCING€HEARINGÌÌÌJoe€B.€Jones,€Presiding€JudgeÌò òÓ  ÓÔ€-¼ÔO€P€I€N€I€O€Nó óà àÔ€-XÔà àà àà àà à€ÌÓ  ÓÌÑ#€öØXÿÿd#ÑÌÓÓà àThe€appellant,€Dickie€L.€Hopkins,€appeals€as€of€right€from€a€judgment€of€the€trialÏcourt€denying€his€suit€for€post„conviction€relief€following€an€evidentiary€hearing.€€In€thisÏCourt,€the€appellant€contends€(1)€his€pleas€of€guilty€were€coerced,€and€(2)€he€wasÏdenied€the€effective€assistance€of€counsel€guaranteed€by€the€Sixth€Amendment€to€theÏUnited€States€Constitution€and€Article€I,€ðð€9€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution€becauseÏcounsel€€(a)€failed€to€notice€the€stateððs€notice€of€enhanced€punishment€was€untimelyÏfiled,€(b)€failed€to€€argue€the€trial€court€should€consider€the€punishment€for€the€offensesÏunder€the€1982€and€1989€versions€of€the€Tennessee€Sentencing€Reform€Acts,€(c)Ïfailed€to€bring€to€the€attention€€of€the€court€the€convictions€used€to€enhance€punishmentÏoccurred€after€he€committed€the€offenses€in€the€present€cases,€and€(d)€failed€to€argueÏtwo€prior€convictions€should€have€been€considered€as€one€offense€for€sentencingÏpurposes.€€After€a€thorough€review€of€the€record,€the€briefs€of€the€parties,€and€theÏauthorities€which€govern€the€issues€presented€for€review,€it€is€the€opinion€of€this€CourtÍthe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€should€be€affirmed€in€part,€reversed€in€part,€andÏremanded€to€the€trial€court€for€a€new€sentencing€hearing.Ìà àThe€evidence€contained€in€the€record€does€not€preponderate€against€the€trialÏcourtððs€finding€the€pleas€of€guilty€entered€by€the€appellant€were€neither€coerced€norÏinvoluntarily€entered.€€Therefore,€this€Court€affirms€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€as€toÏthis€issue€pursuant€to€Rule€20,€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€App.€€However,€the€appellant€is€entitledÏto€post„conviction€relief€regarding€effective€assistance€of€counsel€and€the€sentencingÏissues.€€The€State€of€Tennessee€confesses€error€in€its€brief,€and€it€agrees€this€CourtÏshould€grant€relief€and€remand€this€case€to€the€trial€court€for€a€new€sentencing€hearing.€ÏThe€record€supports€the€conclusion€reached€by€the€state.Ìà àOn€the€27th€day€of€March,€1989,€the€appellant€was€indicted€by€the€FayetteÏCounty€Grand€Jury€for€seven€counts€of€burglary€second€degree.œ× ƒ2 ××  ×›€€The€appellantÏentered€pleas€of€guilty€to€all€seven€counts€on€May€14,€1990,€without€the€benefit€of€aÏplea€bargain€agreement.× ƒ3 ××  ×€€On€May€24,€1990,€the€trial€court€found€the€appellant€to€be€aÏcareer€offender€and€imposed€a€Range€III€sentence€consisting€of€confinement€for€fifteenÏ(15)€years€in€the€Department€of€Correction.€€The€trial€court€ordered€that€counts€one,Ïtwo,€and€three€be€served€consecutively.€€Counts€four,€five,€six,€and€seven€are€to€beÏserved€concurrently€to€all€counts.€€In€addition,€the€sentences€imposed€by€the€trial€courtÏare€to€be€served€consecutively€to€the€sentences€imposed€by€the€Mississippi€courts.€ÍThe€effective€sentence€imposed€in€this€case€was€confinement€for€forty„five€(45)€years€inÏthe€Department€of€Correction.€Ìà àThe€record€reflects€the€offenses€alleged€in€the€indictments€occurred€betweenÏAugust€2,€1988€and€November€1,€1988.€€The€Mississippi€offenses€occurred€betweenÏJuly€26,€1988€€and€January€12,€1989.€€However,€these€fourteen€offenses€were€notÏreduced€to€judgments€of€conviction€until€March€3,€1989,€March€21,€1989,€June€20,Ï1989,€and€September€14,€1989.€€In€summary,€the€Mississippi€cases€were€not€reducedÏto€judgments€until€after€the€appellant€committed€the€offenses€in€Fayette€County.Ìà àThis€Court€is€of€the€opinion€the€appellant€was€denied€the€effective€assistance€ofÏcounsel€during€the€sentencing€hearing€because€counsel€failed€to€(a)€bring€to€theÏattention€of€the€trial€court€the€constitutional€ramifications€of€sentencing€the€appellantÏpursuant€to€the€Tennessee€Sentencing€Reform€Act€of€1989€for€offenses€occurringÏbefore€the€effective€date€of€the€Act€without€considering€the€punishment€set€forth€in€theÏTennessee€Sentencing€Reform€Act€of€1982,€and€(b)€challenge€the€use€of€convictionsÏwhich€were€reduced€to€judgment€after€the€commission€of€the€offenses€in€question.€ÏWhile€the€body€of€law€in€both€areas€was€created€after€the€sentencing€hearing,€theseÏissues€were€being€raised€by€other€attorneys€in€this€state€when€the€sentencing€hearingÏwas€conducted.Ìà àThe€Supreme€Court€held€in€òòState€v.€Blouvettóó,€904€S.W.2d€111,€113€(Tenn.Ï1995),€the€phrase€ð ðprior€convictionðð€contained€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„106(b)(1)Ïmeans€ð ða€conviction€that€has€been€adjudicated€prior€to€the€commission€of€the€moreÏrecent€offense€for€which€sentence€is€to€be€imposed.ðð€€Thus,€the€Mississippi€offenses,Ïwhich€occurred€before€the€commission€of€the€Fayette€County€offenses,€but€not€reducedÍto€judgment€until€after€the€commission€of€the€Fayette€County€offenses,€should€not€haveÏbeen€used€to€determine€the€offender€status€of€the€appellant.€€Ìà àIn€òòState€v.€Pearsonóó,€858€S.W.2d€879€(Tenn.€1993),€the€Supreme€Court€held€theÏòòexóó€òòpostóó€òòfactoóó€provisions€contained€in€both€the€United€States€Constitution€and€theÏTennessee€Constitution€require€an€analysis€of€the€sentences€which€can€be€imposedÏunder€both€the€1982€Act€and€the€1989€Act€when€the€offenses€occurred€prior€to€theÏeffective€date€of€the€1989€Act,€and€the€sentence€was€imposed€after€the€Actððs€effectiveÏdate.€€Most,€if€not€all,€of€the€offenses€occurred€prior€November€1,€1989,€the€effectiveÏdate€of€the€1989€Act.€€Ìà àThe€trial€court€did€not€make€the€requisite€analysis€when€sentencing€theÏappellant.€€€On€remand,€the€trial€court€will€make€the€requisite€analysis€mandated€byÏòòPearsonóó.Ìà àThe€failure€of€counsel€to€pursue€these€two€issues€of€law€during€the€sentencingÏhearing€fell€below€the€standard€of€representation€expected€of€counsel€in€FayetteÏCounty€and€the€State€of€Tennessee.Ìà àThe€claim€œregarding€the›€notice€œof›€enhancement€of€any€sentence€imposed€isÏmoot€given€the€disposition€made€in€this€case.€€Most€of€the€offenses€listed€in€the€noticeÏcannot€be€used€to€enhance€the€appellantððs€sentence.Ìà àWhether€the€two€Shelby€County€cases€should€be€considered€as€only€oneÏoffense€for€sentencing€is€moot€given€the€nature€of€the€relief€granted.€€The€appellantÏmay€establish€the€requisite€facts€to€œdemonstrate€these›€two€offenses€are€to€beÏconsidered€but€one€conviction€as€provided€by€the€applicable€statute.€€ThisÏdetermination€will€require€the€introduction€of€evidence.ÌÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à________________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€€€€€€€JOE€B.€JONES,€PRESIDING€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÇCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ___________________________________Ìà àDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌ___________________________________Ìà àJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JUDGE