WPC $D2覃{T|>8JB%@7 S6)O:X8]Oj~mL^(`O~˂o؍JSqCN$Rf,"K]5(o`\Jşd6=B]">\ : 3(396ڬYS?튒اSΏDq٣Mwt'_DlF ǯ&Fq0ucpC&8֥7 Oa gE`OII=*٫Tסb-fBgPc|O2&@Za~՞eP!;S ͆vBY$cD W M 3g wm$ZGrUz xe`梐/F֎]lJ2I{OP̗K G)aRRƈ9h=[#!UN %i 0(oU:bw@4 - < ND ^ F R mT k 0s 0D ? /  U:uU: AO   0D D/ BFFFF 0Dcc D3 BHP LaserJet 8000 Series PS0(9 Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($,rAZ"Arial Regular- - DPPDӀU@q'3|xðd'L U (8(27$ !   `   0  (#$  0   XPXXX==XXP Ad   FILEDXPX==   November17,1999  CecilCROWSON,Jr.AppellateCourtClerk   7$ `   1    __ԀDuringthistime,thepetitionersfamilyretainedRandy_Fallin_Ԁtorepresentthe `  petitionerinthismatter.However,duetoirreconcilabledifferencesbetweenthepetitionerandFallin,Fallinwasallowedtowithdrawascounsel.   7$ `   2    __ԀApparently,whencounselpresentedthefinalpetitiontothepetitionerforhis `  approval,thepetitioneraddedtheseadditionalfactualgrounds.Duetotimeconstraints,counsel_wasunabletoredraftthepetition_. ,cAZ"Arial Regular X`XXX Ad   TaXX`FILEDX`XTa    XX`November17,1999 ff CecilCROWSON,Jr.AppellateCourtClerk ,cAZ"Arial RegularLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(0*+C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ,,' dxdP Pd(3$ !  ZZZZ'dxd d !  _` X`XXXTR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T8V@XXdd8      q'2;+'h|  `Es t ` qq'2;+'h| `E t ) q ))T$T$_INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE    @ l'26&"h 8` `E: ` 2ttxJ,8 lo'29)%h< `EL: t 8 o @  @  @  @  @  @  @  @ ATKNOXVILLE @  @  @  @  @ 񀀀AUGUSTSESSION,1999 T$T$))  REECECALLOWAY h   )  C.C.A.NO.03C019810CR00352 <` LOUDERMILK,   h   ) (L   0 ` 0 ` T$` T$0 T$ T$0hT$T$0hT$hT$ ) 8 T$T$  ` Appellant,   h   )  SULLIVANCOUNTY $   `     h   ) `     h   )VS. `     h   )      `     h   )  HON.LYNNW.BROWN     STATEOFTENNESSEE,0 h   )  JUDGE hT$hT$  `     h   )    ` Appellee.0  0hT$T$0hT$hT$ )0T$T$(PostConviction)tT$T$      FORTHEAPPELLANT: h     FORTHEAPPELLEE:  STEPHENM.WALLACE h     PAULG.SUMMERS ! DistrictPublicDefender h     AttorneyGeneralandReporter " TERRYL.JORDAN0 h     TODDR.KELLEYv$hT$hT$ AssistantPublicDefender h     AssistantAttorneyGeneral \% P.O.Box8390  0hT$T$    425FifthAvenueNorthB&fhT$hT$ Blountville,TN37617 h     Nashville,TN37243 ('L  `     h     H.GREELEYWELLS,JR. `     h     DistrictAttorneyGeneral `     h      `     h     ROBERTH.MONTGOMERY `     h     GREGORYA.NEWMAN `     h     JOSEPHEUGENEPERRIN `     h     AssistantDistrictAttorneys `     h     140BlountvilleBypass `     h     P.O.Box526 `     h     Blountville,TN376170526OPINIONFILED________________________REVERSEDANDREMANDEDJERRYL.SMITH,JUDGE  :8^-2   3mXX`OPINION#X`X3m.#      ` Thepetitioner,ReeceCallowayLoudermilk,appealstheSullivanCountyCriminalCourtsorderdismissinghispetitionforpostconvictionrelief.In1992,thepetitionerwasconvicteduponpleasofnolocontenderetofour(4)countsofaggravated  rapeandtwo(2)countsofsexualbattery.Thepetitionerfiledaprosepetitionforpost t  convictionreliefin1995,andcounselwassubsequentlyappointedonthepetitionersbehalf.Appointedcounselfiledanamendedpetitionforpostconvictionreliefallegingthatthepetitionerreceivedineffectiveassistanceoftrialcounselandthathispleasof < nolocontenderewereinvoluntary.Thetrialcourtsummarilydismissedthepetition  withoutanevidentiaryhearing.Onappeal,thepetitionerclaimsthat(1)thetrialcourterredindismissingthepetitionwithoutahearing;and(2)thetrialcourterredinrefusingtoconsiderinterlineationsintheamendedpetitionallegingadditionalfactualbasesforhisclaimofineffectiveassistanceofcounsel.AfterathoroughreviewoftherecordbeforethisCourt,wereversethetrialcourtsjudgmentandremandforanevidentiaryhearing.@vv- I.  l( "  ` InOctober1992,thepetitionerenteredpleasofnolocontenderetofour(4) ,"& countsofaggravatedrapeandtwo(2)countsofaggravatedsexualbattery.Threeyearslater,thepetitionerfiledaprosepetitionforpostconvictionreliefclaimingthat /L&* hereceivedineffectiveassistanceoftrialcounsel.Thereafter,thepetitionerfiledtwo |1(,  proseamendmentstohispetition,aswellasnumerousothermotions,includinga H3). motiontoappointcounsel. #  1      ׀InMarch1998,thetrialcourtappointedthePublic `  DefendersOfficetorepresentthepetitioner.  ` Becausetheoriginalpetitionanditssubsequentamendmentspresentedmanydifferentissuesforthecourtsconsideration,atasubsequenthearingthetrialcourtinstructedappointedcounseltodraftafinalamendedpetitionwhichwouldlimittheissuestobedetermined. Thecourtstatedthatitwould proceedonlyonthefinal \  amendedpetition. Counselthenfiledafinalamendedpetitionforpostconvictionrelief (  assertingthatthepetitionerreceivedineffectiveassistanceoftrialcounselandthathispleasofnolocontenderewereinvoluntary. Thefinalamendedpetitionincluded ` interlineationswhichallegedadditionalfactualbasesinsupportofthepetitionersclaimofineffectiveassistanceofcounsel.T #  2      ׀ Further,thefinalpetitiondidnotspecificallyallege \ thatbutfortrialcounselsactions,hewouldnothaveenteredpleasofnolo ( contendereandwouldhaveinsistedongoingtotrial.   ` InAugust1998,thetrialcourtheldahearingonthepetitionforpostconvictionrelief.However,priortothepetitionerintroducinganyevidenceinsupportofhispetition,thetrialcourtruledthatitwouldnotconsidertheinterlineationsinthepetitionbecausecounseldidnotinitialnorapproveof theirlegalvalidity. Thetrialcourtthen ,&  observedthateventhoughthepetitionallegedthattrialcounselsrepresentationwasdeficientinnumerousrespects,thepetitiondidnotspecificallyallegethatthepetitionerwasprejudicedasaresultofcounselsallegeddeficiencies.Thetrialcourtfoundthatbecausethepetitiondidnotallegeprejudice,thepetitionwasinadequateonitsface.  Thetrialcourtdismissedthepetitionasaresult. (/%*  ` Fromthetrialcourtsruling,thepetitionernowbringsthisappeal. 0', Ї@ZZ- II.  `   ` Thepetitionercontendsthatthetrialcourterredindismissingthepostconviction   petitionwithoutanevidentiaryhearingandinstrikingtheinterlineationsinthepetition. p Wemustagree. <  ` Thetrialcourtdismissedthepetitionbecausethepetitionerdidnotspecifically h  allegethatbutfortrialcounselsdeficientperformance,hewouldnothaveentered 4  pleasofnolocontendereandwouldhaveinsistedongoingtotrial.Thecourtreasoned   thatunderStricklandv.Washington,466U.S.668,104S.Ct.2052,80L.Ed.2d674 p (1984),apetitionerclaimingineffectiveassistanceofcounselmustprovenotonlythat < trialcounselsperformancewasdeficientbutalsothatthepetitionerwasprejudicedas h aresultofthedeficientperformance.Thus,becausethepetitiondidnotallegeboth 4 prongsunderStrickland,thetrialcourtfoundthatthepetitiondidnotsufficientlyallege  aconstitutionalclaim.WhileweagreewiththetrialcourtsanalysisofStrickland,we  l believethatdismissingthepetitiononthisbasisiselevatingformoversubstance. "8  ` Thepetitionallegesthatthepetitionerwasdeniedtheeffectiveassistanceof d$ counselunderthefederalandstateconstitutions.Thepetitionfurthersetsoutthe 0&  factualbasesforthepetitionersclaimofineffectiveassistanceofcounsel.We '" concludethatthepetitionadequatelypresentsaconstitutionalclaimwhichwouldentitle )h $ thepetitionertoanevidentiaryhearingsothathemayprovehisclaim.SeeTenn. +4"& CodeAnn.4030210. d-$(  ` Moreover,webelievethatthetrialcourterredinstrikingtheinterlineations 0/%* providingadditionalfactualbasesfortheclaimofineffectiveassistanceofcounsel. 0', Thetrialcourtwasconcernedthatcounseldidnotinitialnorapprovethelegalvalidity 2h). ofeachadditionalground.However,bysigningthebottomofthepetitionwhich 44+0 includedthehandwritteninterlineations,trialcounselimplicitly,ifnotexplicitly,approved `6-2 oftheirlegalvalidity. ,8.4  906 @>>, III.  `   ` Weconcludethatthepetitionforpostconvictionreliefwassufficienttoraisea   constitutionalclaim,andthepetitioneris,therefore,entitledtoanevidentiaryhearing p onthepetition.Furthermore,webelievethattheinterlinedportionsofthepetition < shouldbeconsideredbythetrialcourtaspartofthepetition.Accordingly,the h  judgmentofthetrialcourtisreversed,andthecaseisremandedtothetrialcourtfor 4  furtherproceedingsconsistentwiththisopinion.    `     h   ____________________________________ 8  `     h   JERRYL.SMITH,JUDGE ~ CONCUR:  ___________________________________ !N DAVIDH.WELLES,JUDGE "4 ___________________________________ F% JAMESCURWOODWITT,JUDGE