ÿWPCf, DU .È %öbün­ 0 (½U:åw@4_ 0 ¥s 0DU:\ 0J– 0Tà AQ4Æ… 0^K 0h© 0r 0|ƒ 0†ÿ 0@… BÅ â 0ê D3z 1u­ 0d" 0D† 0DÊ D/ B= U *Z B)„ DC­ AMð =f@t¦gqMò¡?áà^Áö!v~%vÓ“&<þ6X9`(CourierX ù3|x* «<þ6X9`(CourierXôxþ6X@ɹ`7ûX@($¡¡, øð AZ"Arial Regular  U E [  D  [ Ó€' * äzz!(U(2t4$¤¤Ý ƒ !ÝÝ  ÝÓ  ÓÒ°ÒÔ€XÈ5XXXÔà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó, øð AZ"Arial Regular2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô+!,-Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 52, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò d2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô""""'ÿÿdxd $ ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ !ÝÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó..'÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d55557Border 1dd!6Cþÿ << Gÿÿ ùÝ ƒ !ÝÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ+"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€4ÔÔ€4ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€4XÔÌÌò òJune€10,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€4ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó \Ñ\R AØ'\Ñ jÝ ƒ !ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÓ  ÓÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€4Ôà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€petitioner€styled€his€name€"William€Lynn€Johnson,€Sr."€in€hisÏpetition.€Although€we€do€not€have€the€benefit€of€the€charging€instrument,€all€ofÏthe€documents€from€the€underlying€conviction€which€have€been€included€in€theÏrecord€bear€the€name€"William€Lynn€Johnson."€€In€accordance€with€the€policy€ofÏthis€court,€we€will€use€the€name€as€it€appears€in€the€documents€pertaining€to€theÏoriginal€conviction.Ì ]Ý ƒ !ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÓ  ÓÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€4Ôà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€sentencing€information€contained€in€the€record€is€not€legible;Ïtherefore,€we€are€unaware€of€the€length€of€the€petitioner's€sentence.Ì gÝ ƒ !ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÓ  ÓÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€4Ôà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝAccording€to€the€federal€presentence€report€in€the€record,€only€the€1971Ïand€1988€convictions€were€assigned€"points"€under€the€federal€sentencingÏguidelines.Ì CÝ ƒ !ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÓ  ÓÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€4Ôà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€record€does€not€reflect€whether€the€petitioner€pleaded€guilty€as€theÏbasis€for€the€petit€larceny€conviction;€this€is€inferred€from€his€petition,€whichÏrefers€to€"his€Change€of€Plea€transcripts."€€This€court€interprets€this€to€refer€to€theÏtranscript€from€the€guilty€plea€hearing.€€The€record€does€contain€the€writtenÏwaiver€signed€by€the€petitioner€in€his€1988€guilty€plea.Ì —Ý ƒ !ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÓ  ÓÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€4Ôà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝOnly€a€violation€of€the€United€States€or€Tennessee€constitutions€is€aÏproper€basis€for€post„conviction€relief.€€òòHousler€v.€Stateóó,€749€S.W.2d€758,€761Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988).€€€In€òòBoykin€v.€Alabamaóó,€395€U.S.€238,€89€S.€Ct.€1709Ï(1969),€the€Supreme€Court€held€that€the€Constitution€requires€that€defendantsÏbe€advised€prior€to€the€acceptance€of€guilty€pleas€of€their€constitutional€rights,Ïincluding€the€right€not€to€give€self„incriminating€statements.€€€€Tennessee€hasÏexpanded€on€the€òòBoykinóó€litany€to€be€given€to€defendants€in€this€state.€€òòSeeÏgenerallyóó€òòMackey€v.€Stateóó,€553ÌS.W.2d€337€(Tenn.€1977).€€In€òòState€v.€McClintockóó,€732€S.W.2d€268€(Tenn.Ï1987),Ïthe€supreme€court€said€a€defendant€has€the€right€to€be€informed€of€theÏenhancement€possibilities€of€his€or€her€plea€to€a€Tennessee€offense.€€TheÏabsence€of€the€additional€òòMcClintockóó€admonishment,€however,€does€not€affectÏthe€constitutionality€of€the€plea€under€òòBoykinóó.€€òòBlankenship€v.€Stateóó,€858€S.W.2dÏ897,€905€(Tenn.€1993).€€Therefore,€only€the€alleged€absence€of€theÏadmonishment€the€appellant€was€privileged€not€to€give€incriminatory€statementsÏagainst€himself€is€potentially€a€proper€claim€for€this€court's€review.€Ì ×Ý ƒ !ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÓ  ÓÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€4Ôà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝCuriously,€the€lower€court€also€found€without€elaboration€that€theÏpetitioner's€claim€was€previously€determined.€€Because€we€dispose€of€theÏpetitioner's€claim€based€upon€the€statute€of€limitations,€we€have€not€addressedÏthe€propriety€of€this€finding€by€the€lower€court.Ì TÝ ƒ !ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÓ  ÓÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€4Ôà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝAs€previously€noted€by€this€court,€July€1,€1989€was€a€Saturday;Ïtherefore,€€post„conviction€claims€existing€prior€to€the€July€1,€1986€effective€dateÏof€the€three„year€statute€of€limitations€were€barred€if€not€filed€by€the€followingÏMonday,€July€3,€1989.€€òòStephen€L.€Carey€v.€Stateóó,€No.€03C01„9309„CR„00330Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€Nov.€8,€1994),€òòperm.€app.€deniedóó€(Tenn.€1995).Ì ìÝ ƒ !ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÓ  ÓÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÔ€4Ôà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€appellant€mistakenly€seeks€to€avail€himself€of€the€benefit€of€CodeÏsection€40„30„206(g)(2),€which€provides€that€a€claim€is€not€waived€if€the€failureÏto€present€it€was€the€result€of€state€action€in€violation€of€the€state€or€federalÏconstitution.€€This€provision€is€applicable€to€a€claim€that€has€been€otherwiseÏwaived€by€failure€to€present€it€in€earlier€proceedings,€i.e.€on€direct€appeal€or€in€aÏprior€post„conviction€proceeding,€not€a€claim€which€his€barred€by€the€statute€ofÏlimitations.€Ì€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„206(g)€(Supp.€1996).€€Nevertheless,€asÏannounced€in€òòBurfordóó,€the€statute€of€limitations€is€not€a€òòper€seóó€bar€to€untimelyÏclaims,€and€we€consider€the€substance€of€the€petitioner's€argumentÏnotwithstanding€his€citation€to€an€inapplicable€provision€of€the€Code.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 ÒÝ ƒ !ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÑ ` ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓ  ÓÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€4ÔÑ7€ ò XdðdÈ7Ñ›Þ ÞÌÌÑ€Ñò òà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEE̜ـÙßR€786A1-j|¶ÿ.` Å `€€@ÿRߛ̀à@ àAT€JACKSONÌó óÌà@ àMARCH€1997€SESSIONÌÌÌÌò òWILLIAM€LYNN€JOHNSON,à àà àó ó)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àà àAppellant,à àà àà à)à àC.C.A.€No.€02C01„9605„CR„00136Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìvs.à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àœShelby›€Countyà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,ó óà àà àà à)à àHon.€Carolyn€WadeÏBlackett,€Judge€à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌà àà àAppellee.à àà àà à)à à(Post„Conviction)Ìà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 à)à0 àÌà àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌFOR€THE€APPELLANT:à àà àà àà àFOR€THE€APPELLEE:ÌÌWILLIAM€LYNN€JOHNSONà àà àà àJOHN€KNOX€WALKUPÌPro€Seà àà àà àà àà àà àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÌF.C.I.€MemphisÌP.O.€Box€34550€(Beale€Unit)ÌMemphis,€TN€€38184„0550à àà àà àELLEN€H.€POLLACKÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àCriminal€Justice€DivisionÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243„0493à àÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àJOHN€W.€PIEROTTIÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àPAUL€GOODMANÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAsst.€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àThird€FloorÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àCriminal€Justice€ComplexÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à201€PoplarÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àMemphis,€TN€€38103ÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€____________________ÌÌÌò òAFFIRMEDó óÌÌÌCURWOOD€WITT€ÌJUDGEÑ€9ÑÇÑ7€â XXdð Xdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÑ7€ ò XXdðXXdð7ÑÌÌà@ àò òOPINIONó óÓÓÌà àà àThe€œpetitioner,›€William€Lynn€Johnson,× ƒ: ××  ×€appeals€the€Shelby€CountyÏCriminal€Court's€summary€dismissal€of€his€post„conviction€petition.€€TheÏœpetitioner›€is€currently€incarcerated€for€convictions€received€in€federal€court,€andÏhe€contends€his€federal€sentence€was€enhanced€in€part€based€uponÏunconstitutional€prior€convictions€in€the€state€courts€of€Tennessee.€€His€post„conviction€petition€challenges€those€prior€Tennessee€convictions.€€Upon€reviewÏof€the€record,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€court€below.ÌÌà àà àThe€petitioner€is€presently€serving€œa€sentence›€of€undisclosedÏlength× ƒ; ××  ×€in€the€Federal€Correctional€Institution€in€Memphis€for€his€convictions€inÏthe€Federal€District€Court€for€the€Western€District€of€Tennessee.€€He€has€aÏlengthy€history€in€the€State€of€Tennessee's€criminal€justice€system.€€It€is€relevantÏfor€purposes€of€this€appeal€that€he€was€convicted€of€petit€larceny€in€1971€andÏœ1972›€and€second€degree€murder€and€carrying€a€pistol€by€means€of€using€aÍfirearm€in€1979.€€The€latter€sentence€was€affirmed€by€this€court€in€1980.€€òòSeeóóÏòòState€v.€William€Lynn€Johnsonóó,€No.€41€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Jackson,€May€15,Ï1980),€òòperm.€app.€deniedóó€(Tenn.€1980).€€Thereafter,€he€filed€a€post„convictionÏpetition€as€to€that€conviction,€and€relief€was€denied.€€The€dismissal€of€his€petitionÏwas€affirmed€by€this€court.€€òòState€v.€William€Lynn€Johnsonóó,€No.€74€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.,€Jackson,€Dec.€29,€1983),€òòperm.€app.€deniedóó€(Tenn.€1984).€€Thereafter,€theÏpetitioner€filed€a€petition€for€writ€of€habeas€corpus€with€the€federal€district€court,Ïand€he€was€awarded€a€new€trial.€€òòJohnson€v.€Duttonóó,€No.€84„2776H€(W.D.€Tenn.ÏJune€13,€1986).€This€order€was€subsequently€affirmed€by€the€U.S.€Court€ofÏAppeals€for€the€Sixth€Circuit.€€òòJohnson€v.€Duttonóó,€No.€86„5760€(6th€Cir.€June€1,Ï1987).€€On€February€12,€1988,€prior€to€retrial,€the€petitioner€entered€a€guilty€pleaÏto€the€offense€of€murder€in€the€second€degree€and€received€a€œtwelve„year›Ïsentence.€€He€was€released€from€prison€later€that€year.€€On€February€10,€1989,Ïthe€petitioner€was€arrested€and€subsequently€charged€in€a€federal€indictmentÏwith€three€counts€of€possession€of€cocaine€with€intent€to€distribute€and€oneÏcount€of€use€of€a€firearm€in€relation€to€a€drug€trafficking€offense.€œThe€petitioner›Ïthereafter€entered€guilty€pleas€on€three€of€the€four€counts€alleged€in€theÏindictment.€€He€is€currently€serving€his€sentence€for€the€convictions€pursuant€toÏthose€guilty€pleas€at€the€Federal€Correctional€Institution€in€Memphis.€€The€lengthÏof€the€federal€sentence€was€enhanced,€in€part,€due€to€the€1971,€1972€and€1988ÍTennesee€convictions.× ƒ< ××  ×€€In€his€post„conviction€petition€filed€on€February€28,Ï1996€in€the€Criminal€Court€of€Shelby€County,€he€attacks€the€œconstitutionality›€œof›Ïthe€œenhancing›€Tennessee€convictions,€alleging€he€was€not€advised€prior€to€hisÏguilty€pleas× ƒ= ××  ×€of€his€right€against€self„incrimination€and€that€these€convictionsÏmight€be€used€to€enhance€his€sentence€for€any€subsequent€conviction.œ× ƒ> ××  ×›€ÍFollowing€the€œstate's€motion›€to€dismiss€the€petition€as€untimely,€the€court€belowÏfound€without€a€hearing€that€the€petitioner's€claim€was€barred€by€the€statute€ofÏlimitations.× ƒ? ××  ×€The€petitioner€is€before€us€in€his€appeal€of€that€decision.ÌÌà àà àThe€petitioner's€post„conviction€petition€was€filed€on€February€28,Ï1996.€€Ostensibly,€the€1995€Post„Conviction€Procedure€Act€is€applicable€to€allÏclaims€filed€after€May€10,€1995.€€òòSee€generallyóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„30„201Ïthrough€„222€(Supp.€1996).€That€legislation€provides€that€an€individual€must€fileÏfor€post„conviction€œrelief€›œ"within›€one€(1)€year€of€the€date€on€which€the€judgmentÏbecame€final,€or€consideration€of€such€petition€shall€be€barred."€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„30„202(a)€(Supp.€1996).€€The€Act€also€provides,€"notwithstanding€anyÏother€provision€of€this€part€to€the€contrary,€any€person€having€ground€for€reliefÏrecognized€under€this€part€shall€have€at€least€one€(1)€year€from€May€10,€1995,€toÏfile€a€petition€or€a€motion€to€reopen€a€petition€under€this€part."€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ïðð€40„30„201,€Compiler's€Notes€(Supp.€1996).€€ÌÌà àà àPrior€to€the€enactment€of€the€1995€Post„Conviction€Procedure€Act,Ïpost„conviction€petitions€had€to€be€filed€within€(a)€three€years€of€the€date€of€theÏfinal€action€of€the€highest€state€appellate€court€to€which€an€appeal€was€taken,€orÏ(b)€three€years€from€July€1,€1986,€the€effective€date€of€the€statute.€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„30„102€(1990)€(repealed€1995);€òòState€v.€Mullinsóó,€767€S.W.2d€668,Ï669€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988).€€An€exception€applied,€however,€to€preserve€theÏright€of€a€post„conviction€petitioner€to€mount€an€otherwise€untimely€challengeÏwhere€strict€application€of€the€statute€of€limitations€would€deprive€the€petitionerÏof€due€process€of€law.€€òòBurford€v.€Stateóó,€845€S.W.2d€204€(Tenn.€1992).€€ÌÌà àà àThe€petitioner€makes€several€alternative€arguments€why€he€shouldÏnot€be€barred€by€either€the€one€year€or€three€year€statutes€of€limitations.ÌÌà àà àFirst,€he€contends€his€petition€should€not€have€been€dismissed€asÏuntimely€because€the€Tennessee€offenses€were€committed€prior€to€theÏenactment€of€the€three€year€statute€of€limitations,€and€application€of€that€statuteÏof€limitations€is€an€òòex€post€factoóó€infringement€of€his€constitutional€rights.€€WeÏœdisagree.€€This€court€has€addressed€this€issue€on€several€occasions€and€foundÏno€òòex€post€factoóó€violation€in€limiting€the€period€of€time€within€which€a€post„conviction€challenge€may€be€made€even€though€the€conviction€predates€theÍenactment€of€the€statute€of€limitations.€›€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòState€v.€Richard€S.€Butleróó,€No.Ï1338€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€May€19,€œ1992);›€òòBobby€Silas€Robinson€v.ÏStateóó,€No.€87„69„III€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Nashville,€Jan.€6,€1988).ÌÌà àà àAlternatively,€the€petitioner€argues€òòBurfordóó€provides€an€exceptionÏto€the€three€year€statute€of€limitations€which€allows€him€to€institute€a€proceedingÏto€attack€his€Tennessee€convictions,€notwithstanding€the€three€year€limitation.€ÏAgain,€we€disagree.€€òòBurfordóó€was€a€unique€case€in€which€the€petitioner€wasÏcaught€in€a€procedural€trap€in€which€he€first€had€to€successfully€challengeÏconvictions€in€a€post„conviction€proceeding€in€one€county€in€order€to€have€aÏjusticiable€claim€for€relief€œin€Çpost„conviction›€proceedings€in€another€county.€€òòBurfordóó,€845€S.W.2d€at€208.€€HeÏwas€caught€in€a€quandary€because€œthe›€approach€of€the€statute€of€limitationsÏapplicable€to€the€latter€claim€was€looming€prior€to€a€determination€of€the€formerÏclaim.€€òòBurfordóó,€845€S.W.2d€at€208.€€The€supreme€court€found€the€application€ofÏthe€statute€of€limitations€to€the€latter€claim€violative€of€due€process€in€that€limitedÏcircumstance€and€allowed€the€òòBurfordóó€petitioner€to€maintain€his€claimÏnotwithstanding€the€statute€of€limitations.€€òòSeeóó€òòBurfordóó,€845€S.W.2d€at€209„10.€ÏòòBurfordóó€did€not,€however,€give€post„conviction€petitioners€the€right€to€wageÏcollateral€attack€on€stale€convictions€themselves€outside€the€statute€ofÏœlimitations.€€To€be€sure,€the€petitioner€in€òòBurfordóó€filed€his€attack€on€his€enhancingÏconvictions€within€the€time€then€allowed€under€the€Act.€€òòSee€generallyóó€òòBurfordóó,Ï845€S.W.2d€204.€€Unlike€òòBurfordóó,€the€petitioner€herein€seeks€to€challenge€notÏhis€enhanced€federal€sentence,€over€which€this€court€has€no€jurisdiction,€but€hisÏenhancing€Tennessee€convictions.€€In€this€situation,€the€òòBurfordóó€exception€isÏinapplicable.ÌÌà àà àIn€the€next€alternative,€the€petitioner€argues€his€claims€should€notÏbe€barred€by€the€three€year€statute€of€limitations€which€otherwise€barred€hisÍclaims€on€July€3,€1989× ƒ@ ××  ×€as€to€the€1971€and€1972€convictions€and€February€12,Ï1991€as€to€the€1988€conviction€because€the€federal€facility€in€which€he€isÏincarcerated€does€not€have€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€available€for€use€byÏprisoners.× ƒA ××  ×€€Although€it€is€not€entirely€clear,€it€appears€from€the€record€that€theÏappellant€has€been€in€federal€custody€since€February€10,€1989.€€The€recordÏdoes€not€reflect€whether€all€of€this€detention€and€incarceration€has€been€at€theÏFederal€Correctional€Institute€in€Memphis,€where€the€appellant€alleges€he€doesÏnot€have€access€to€Tennessee€law€materials.€We€are€not€persuaded€by€theÏpetitioner's€argument.€€These€facts€do€not€fit€within€any€of€the€exceptions€forÏuntimely€filing€under€Code€section€40„30„202(b).€ÌÌà àà àWe€note€parenthetically€that€the€petitioner€makes€no€allegationÏwith€respect€to€his€access€to€legal€materials€from€the€dates€of€his€guilty€pleas€forÏthe€prior€Tennessee€offenses,€until€February€10,€1989,€the€date€he€came€intoÏfederal€custody.€€òòSeeóó€òòSands€v.€Stateóó,€903€S.W.2d€297€(Tenn.€1995)€(petitionerÏwho€did€not€have€access€to€law€library€while€incarcerated€in€Florida€failed€toÏshow€he€did€not€have€an€opportunity€to€present€his€claim€where€it€was€notÏbased€on€"later€arising€ground");€òòPaul€R.€Spence€v.€Stateóó,€No.€968€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.,€Knoxville,€Nov.€3,€1991),€òòperm.€app.€deniedóó€(Tenn.€1992)€(petitionerÏincarcerated€in€another€state€who€did€not€have€access€to€Tennessee€legalÏmaterials€not€entitled€to€file€untimely€post„conviction€petition).€€Moreover,€he€hasÏoffered€no€explanation€for€his€failure€to€pursue€post„conviction€relief€in€nearly€25Ïyears.€òòCfóó.€òòThomas€L.€Mills€v.€Stateóó,€No.€03C01„9505„CR„00137€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.,€Knoxville,€Jan.€31,€1996)€(petitioner€who€claimed€ignorance€of€post„conviction€statute€of€limitations€not€entitled€to€file€untimely€claim).€€Accordingly,Ïwe€fail€to€find€merit€in€this€argument.ÌÌà àà àThe€petitioner€also€urges€the€court€that€his€claims€are€not€barredÏbecause€òòState€v.€Newsomeóó,€778€S.W.2d€34€(Tenn.€1989)€and€òòState€v.€Frazieróó,Ï784€S.W.2d€927€(Tenn.€1990)€clarified€relevant€existing€law,€and€his€statute€ofÍlimitations€should€be€computed€from€the€dates€of€release€of€those€opinions.€ÏThis€argument€is€without€merit.€€These€cases€announced€no€new€constitutionalÏrights€which€required€retrospective€application.€€Moreover,€the€petition€was€filedÏsix€and€five€years,€respectively,€after€these€decisions.€€Even€under€the€old€act,Ïthis€filing€was€outside€the€statute€of€limitations.Ì›à àà àÌà àà àThe€petitioner's€next€argument€is€that€the€statute€of€limitationsÏcannot€apply€to€him€because€he€is€a€federal€prisoner.€€This€contention€is€withoutÏmerit.€€òòPassarella€v.€Stateóó,€891€S.W.2d€619,€622„23€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1994);Ïòòaccordóó€òòPhillip€Woody€v.€Stateóó,€No.€03C01„92„11„CR„00396€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,ÏKnoxville,€July€29,€1993)€(statute€of€limitations€barred€federal€prisoner'sÏchallenge€to€Tennessee€convictions€used€to€enhance€federal€sentence).ÌÌà àà àThe€petitioner€next€posits€that€even€if€his€claim€is€barred€by€theÏformer€three€year€statute€of€limitations,€the€1995€Post„Conviction€Procedure€ActÏrevives€his€right€to€file€a€post„conviction€petition€within€one€year€of€that€statute'sÏeffective€date.€€In€òòArnold€Carter€v.€Stateóó,€No.€03C01„9509„CC„00270€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.,€Knoxville,€July€11,€1996),€òòperm.€app.€grantedóó€(Tenn.€Dec.€12,€1996),Ïthis€court€held€that€the€new€Act€provided€such€a€window€in€which€any€petitionerÏcould€seek€post„conviction€relief€even€if€that€petition€had€previously€been€barredÍby€the€statute€of€limitations.€€Judge€David€Welles€filed€a€strong€dissentingÏopinion.€€The€reasoning€of€that€dissent€has€formed€the€basis€for€every€decisionÏsince€written.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòJohnny€Tillman€v.€Stateóó,€No.€03C01„9512„CR„00413Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€Feb.€12,€1997),€òòpetition€for€perm.€app.€filedóó€(Tenn.ÏFeb.€18,€1997);€òòDoyle€Carter€v.€Stateóó,€No.€01C01„9511„CC„00398€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.,€Nashville,€Feb.€12,€1997).€€The€new€Act€was€not€meant€to€reviveÏpreviously€barred€claims.ÌÌà àà àAdditionally,€the€petitioner€argues€that€his€claim€was€not€restrictedÏby€a€statute€of€limitations€prior€to€the€enactment€of€the€1995€Act€because€formerÏCode€section€40„30„102€applied€only€to€claims€where€an€appeal€was€taken€toÏthe€highest€state€appellate€court,€not€where€the€conviction€followed€a€guilty€plea.€ÏThis€contention€is€wholly€without€merit.€€This€court€has€routinely€found€theÏstatute€of€limitations€on€a€post„conviction€claim€arising€from€a€proceeding€inÏwhich€a€guilty€plea€was€entered€to€commence€on€the€date€the€judgment€ofÏconviction€was€entered.€€òòSee,€e.g.óó,€òòSharon€Ann€Conner€v.€Stateóó,€No.€03C01„9509„CC„00279€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€June€3,€1996);€òòVernon€WayneÏMauldin€v.€Stateóó,€No.€03C01„9411„CR„00408€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€MayÏ25,€1995);€òòperm.€app.€deniedóó€(Tenn.€1995).ÌÌà àà àFinally,€the€appellant€has€not€asserted€any€grounds€for€allowingÏuntimely€consideration€of€his€petition€under€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€sectionÏ40„30„202(b).€€Thus,€the€three€year€statute€of€limitations€applicable€to€theÏpetitioner's€claims€under€the€old€Act€expired€on€February€12,€1991€and€July€3,Ï1989.€€His€claim€is€now€barred.ÌÌà àà àWe€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€in€dismissing€this€petition.ÌÌÓÓœÌÌ›à àà àà àà àà àà à_______________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àCURWOOD€WITT,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌÇÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌœ_________________________________›ÌJOSEPH€B.€JONES,€PRESIDING€œJUDGEÌ›ÌÌÌœ›œòò(NOT€PARTICIPATING)€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌóóGARY€R.€WADE,€JUDGE€›ÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌ