WPC # VUNa % 0(bw@4% 9 0JH 0T 0^ 0hD 0r 0| 0 0 1u U,% 0dQ U, U> U *B)IDCr AM B,v~Kv D3 0@ AO^ 0D$ D/h BHP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPT0 (9 Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($- - lEmnDopEqrEstӀ{s 3|x2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23    ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)<  9p`(ModernP 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<  9p`(Monaco<  9p`(&Times New Roman<  9p`(Arial% Line 7 d""""7Border 1dd-#C << G d " !  #d#   !!   YYY FILED!X July26,1996CecilCrowson,Jr.!AppellateCourtClerk PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'`Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Monaco   BA Op Monaco  BA Op Monaco %%%%'dxd("$    -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! . &Xd&#Xd#      ` !\RA'\7&XXdd7      INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEEATJACKSONL$&#;+'h|{`  `LFEBRUARYSESSION,1996  STATEOFTENNESSEE,  ) C.C.A.NO.02C019506CR00175     )  Appellee,   )     )     ) SHELBYCOUNTYVS.     )      ) HON.BERNIEWEINMAN LARRYMCKAY,and   ) JUDGE MICHAELEUGENESAMPLE  )  Appellant.   ) (PostConvictionRelief)     FORTHEAPPELLANT:   FORTHEAPPELLEE:LARRYMCKAY    CHARLESW.BURSONAppellantProse    AttorneyGeneralandReporterR.M.S.I.UnitII,206D7475CockrillBendInd.Rd.  JOHNH.BAKER,IIINashville,TN372091010   AssistantAttorneyGeneral      450JamesRobertsonParkwayMICHAELEUGENESAMPLE  Nashville,TN37243AppellantProseR.M.S.I.UnitII102C   JOHNW.PIEROTTI7475CockrillBendInd.Rd.  DistrictAttorneyGeneralNashville,TN372091010      REGINALDR.HENDERSON      AssistantDistrictAttorney      201PoplarAvenue      Memphis,TN38103      OPINIONFILED________________________AFFIRMEDJERRYL.SMITH,JUDGE  ! OPINION !  !X AppellantsLarryMcKayandMichaelEugeneSamplewereconvictedofmurderandsentencedtodeathin1982.SincetheTennesseeSupremeCourtupheldtheseconvictionsandsentencesinStatev.McKay,680S.W.2d447(Tenn.1984),cert.denied,470U.S.1034(1985),Appellantshavefilednumerouspostconvictionpetitionswiththetrialcourt.TwoofthesepostconvictionproceedingshavebeenbeforethiscourtonappealwiththeresultthatneitherAppellantwasentitledtopostconvictionrelief.Samplev.State,No.02C019104CR00062,1995WL66563(Tenn.Crim.App.Feb.15,1995);McKayv.State,No.25,1989WL17507(Tenn.Crim.App.Mar.1,1989).Inaddition,anentirelydifferentpostconvictionpetitionis,atthistime,pendingbeforeanotherpanelofthiscourt. This,Appellantsmostrecentpostconvictionappeal,arisesfromaprosepetitionfiledintheMemphisCriminalCourt.OnJanuary4,1993,thetrialcourtdeniedthispetitionwithnoevidentiaryhearingstatingthatAppellantshaveallegednonewgroundswhichwouldtolltherunningofthestatuteoflimitations.Weagreeandaffirmthetrialcourtsdismissaluponproceduralgrounds. Appellantspetitionisbasedupontwogrounds:first,Appellantsclaimtheyfailedtoreceivetheeffectiveassistanceoftrialcounselwithconclusoryreferencestothetrialattorneysallegedfailuretopresentadefense,theabsenceofanelectionastowhichtypeoffirstdegreemurdertheStatewasprosecuting,andallegedlytaintedwitnessidentifications.Also,Appellantscomplainoftheallegedineffectivenessoftherepresentationtheyreceivedfromtheirpostconvictioncounsel.InAppellantssecondissue,theyclaimadoublejeopardyviolationreferringtotheirindictmentsforbothfelonymurderandpremeditatedmurderarisingoutofthesametransaction. Wefirstnotethatthispetitionwasfiledin1992whichiswellbeyondthethreeyearstatuteoflimitationsmandatedbythePostConvictionProcedureAct.Tenn.CodeAnn.4030102(1990).However,inBurfordv.State,845S.W.2d204,20809(Tenn.1992),ourSupremeCourtcreatedadueprocessexceptiontothestatuteoflimitationsfindingitinapplicablewhereagroundforreliefdoesnotariseorisnotcreateduntilsuchatimethatthetimebarwoulddepriveapetitionerofareasonableopportunitytohavetheclaimadjudicated.Wedonotfindthatsuchareasonableopportunitywasforeclosedinthepresentcase.Theclaimsmadeinthepetition,ifmeritorious,existedandhavebeenavailabletobepursuedsincethepetitionerwasconvicted.SeeStatev.Phillips,904S.W.2d123,124(Tenn.Crim.App.1995). TheonlyissuewhichhasnotexistedsincethetimeofAppellantsconvictionarisesfromtheallegationthatAppellantspostconvictioncounselwasineffective.However,Tennesseecourtshavelongheldthatthereisnoconstitutionalnorstatutoryrighttoeffectiveassistanceofcounselinpostconvictionproceedings.Statev.Oates,698S.W.2d79,81(Tenn.Crim.App.1985);Recorv.State,489S.W.2d64,68(Tenn.Crim.App.1972),cert.denied,411U.S.920(1973);seealsoHousev.State,911S.W.2d705,712(Tenn.1995)(holdingthat acourtshouldnotconsidertheineffectivenessofcounselatapriorpostconvictionproceedingindecidingwhetheragroundforreliefhasbeenpreviouslydetermined),cert.denied,64U.S.L.W.3763(1996). Furthermore,AppellantsclaimsregardingineffectivetrialcounselanddoublejeopardyviolationsfallwithinthePostConvictionActsprohibitionongroundswhichhavebeenpreviouslydeterminedorwaived.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.403011(1990). Agroundforreliefispreviouslydeterminedifacourtofcompetentjurisdictionhasruledonthemeritsafterafullandfairhearing.Id.4030112(a).InAppellantsfirstpostconvictionappeal,thiscourtupheldthetrialcourtsfindingofcompetenttrialcounselstatingthatthe allegations[ofineffectiveness]wereventilatedinanextendedevidentiaryhearing.McKayv.State,No.25,1989WL17507,at*2(Tenn.Crim.App.Mar.1,1989).Therefore,thisgroundhasbeenpreviouslydetermined. Finally,agroundforpostconvictionreliefiswaived ifthepetitionerknowinglyandunderstandinglyfailedtopresentitfordeterminationinanyproceedingbeforeacourtofcompetentjurisdictioninwhichthegroundcouldhavebeenpresented.Tenn.CodeAnn.4030112(b).OurSupremeCourthasimposeduponwaiverinthepostconvictioncontext anobjectivestandardunderwhichapetitionerisboundbytheactionorinactionofhisattorney.House,911S.W.2dat714.WerethereanymerittoAppellantsclaimswithrespecttodoublejeopardy,theseissueswerewaivedbytheiromissionfromanyoneoftheAppellantspriorpostconvictionpetitionsaswellasthedirectappealofthiscase. Accordingly,weaffirmthetrialcourtsdismissalofthispostconvictionpetition.!       ____________________________________     JERRYL.SMITH,JUDGECONCUR:___________________________________JOSEPHB.JONES,PRESIDINGJUDGE___________________________________GARYR.WADE,JUDGE