WPC  HveM-f24Opvˠ׷GV; -ғ0/M$$UK.u~c=W3ʏGq644B+ e"'$EIۭ `BggqnL5CUPS]YG l!['њo,Uy9c04>-EyN!e<3Gл$",|.vh Q/%z <{ׇ.ܴ865aq2#ê+Q Lbx@ 7AXXdXXd7@)D OPINION      ` Thepetitioner,RickyEarlMelvin,appealsthedismissalofhispetitionforpostconvictionreliefbytheDavidsonCountyCriminalCourt.HavingbeenconvictedofsevencountsofaggravatedrapeandservinganeffectivesentenceofsixtyfiveyearsintheDepartmentofCorrection,thepetitionercontendshereceivedineffectiveassistanceofcounsel.Afteracarefulreviewoftherecord,weaffirmthejudgmentofthetrialcourt.@&D PROCEDURALHISTORY    ` Afterhisfirsttrialendedwithahungjury,thepetitionerwasconvictedathis  secondtrialonsevencountsofaggravatedrape.Theconvictionswerebaseduponnumerousincidentsinvolvingtwofemalesunderthirteenyearsofage.Hereceivedaneffectivesentenceofeightyfiveyears.Uponappealtothiscourt,thesentencewasreducedtoaneffectivetermofsixtyfiveyears.SeeStatev.Melvin,913S.W.2d195 xp (Tenn.Crim.App.1995).PermissiontoappealwasdeniedbytheTennesseeSupremeCourt. ` Thepetitionertimelyfiledapetitionforpostconvictionreliefallegingineffectiveassistanceofcounsel.Afteranevidentiaryhearing,thetrialcourtdismissedthepetition.@PP#D CONTENTIONSOFPETITIONER  x-p&)  ` Thesoleissueinthisappealiswhetherthepetitionerwasdeprivedofeffectiveassistanceofcounselathistrial.Thepetitionercontendstrialcounselwasineffectiveinthefollowingrespects:0 `  1.failingtochallengethetestimonyofthenursepractitioner; ` %` % М8 ` 8 ` (#` (#2.  failingtoutilizethetestimonyofDr.IreneRatner;6/3   815 8 ` 8 ` (#` (#3.  failingtointerviewotherpossiblesuspects;   ` 8 4.  failingtohaveavictimexaminedbyanexpert; (# (# 8 ` 8 ` (#` (#5.  failuretoseekfundingforaninvestigator;and   8 ` 8 ` (#` (#6.  failingtoconductanadequateinvestigationofthe8@ 8@ 8@8@ 8@    8 ` 8 ` (#` (#8 factsandwitnesses. xx 񜛜@$D POSTCONVICTIONHEARING  XP   ` Theonlywitnesstotestifyatthepostconvictionhearingwasthepetitionerstrial 80  counsel,ThomasT.Overton.Asummaryofpertinentportionsofhistestimonyfollows. ` Atthetrialanursepractitionertestifiedastoavictimsphysicalfindingsthatwereconsistentwithsexualabuse.Overtoninterviewedthewitnesspriortotrial.Althoughhedidnotrecallwhetherhefiledamotioninliminetoprohibitthetestimony,  therewasnolegalbasistodoso. ` ThepetitionersfamilyretainedtheservicesofDr.IreneRatnerforanevaluation.OvertondecidednottoutilizeDr.Ratnerattrial.Overtonfelthertestimonywouldlikelybeinadmissible.Furthermore,hefearedhertestimonymightbedamagingbecausesheconcludedthepetitionercouldnotbeexcludedasapossiblechildsexabuser. ` Overtontestifiedthathemadeeffortstocontactotherpossiblesuspectsbutwasunsuccessful.Nevertheless,hearguedtothejurythatotherfamilymemberscouldhavebeenresponsiblefortheallegedcrimes. ` AlthoughOvertonhadthepetitionerevaluatedbyDr.Ratner,hedidnotaskforfundingforanyotherexpertstoevaluateoneofthevictims.Overtonbelievedthattestimonyonchildsexabusesyndromewouldhavebeeninadmissible.Furthermore,theallegedabusehadtakenplaceyearsearlier.Thevictimhadintercoursesincethat 815 time;therefore,anexaminationwouldnotproveuseful. ` Overtontestifiedthathespentoveronehundredhoursinpreparationforthepetitionerstrial.Heinvestigatedthefactshimselfanddidnotseekfundingforaninvestigator.@FF$D TRIALCOURTSFINDINGS  H@   ` ThetrialcourtfoundthatOvertonrenderedcompetentrepresentation.Itfound (  thatOvertonwasthoroughlypreparedfortrialandhadconductedaproperinvestigation.ThetrialcourtfoundthatthedecisionnottoutilizeDr.Ratnerwasapropertacticaldecision.Itfurtherfoundthefailuretosecureanexperttoperformanexaminationononeofthevictimswasreasonableduetothelapseoftimesincetheallegedabuse.Thetrialcourtfurtherfoundthetestimonyofthenursepractitionerwasproperlyadmitted.Inconclusion,thetrialcourtfoundthepetitionerhadfailedtoestablishineffectiveassistanceofcounsel.@&D STANDARDOFREVIEW  %  XXX X, ` ThiscCourtCourtreviewsaclaimofineffectiveassistanceofcounselunderthe &" standardsofBaxterv.Rose,523S.W.2d930(Tenn.1975),andStricklandv. (!$ Washington,466U.S.668,104S.Ct.2052,80L.Ed.2d674(1984).Thepetitionerhas *x#& theburdentoprovethat(1)theattorneysperformancewasdeficient,and(2)thedeficientperformanceresultedinprejudicetothedefendantsoastodeprivehimofafairtrial.Stricklandv.Washington,466U.S.at687,104S.Ct.at2064;Goadv.State, /(, 938S.W.2d363,369(Tenn.1996);Overtonv.State,874S.W.2d6,11(Tenn.1994); 1*. Butlerv.State,789S.W.2d898,899(Tenn.1990). |3t,0  ` ThetestinTennesseeindeterminingwhethercounselprovidedeffectiveassistanceiswhetherhisperformancewaswithintherangeofcompetencedemanded 816 ofattorneysincriminalcases.Baxterv.Rose,523S.W.2dat936.Thepetitionermust  overcomethepresumptionthatcounselsconductfallswithinthewiderangeofacceptableprofessionalassistance.Stricklandv.Washington,466U.S.at689,104S.   Ct.at2065;Alleyv.State,958S.W.2d138,149(Tenn.Crim.App.1997);Statev. l d Williams,929S.W.2d385,389(Tenn.Crim.App.1996).Therefore,inordertoprovea 80 deficiency,apetitionermustshowthatcounselsactsoromissionsweresoseriousastofallbelowanobjectivestandardofreasonablenessunderprevailingprofessionalnorms.Stricklandv.Washington,466U.S.at688,104S.Ct.at2065;Henleyv.State,   960S.W.2dat579;Goadv.State,938S.W.2dat369. h`  ` Inreviewingcounsel'sconduct,a"fairassessment...requiresthateveryeffortbemadetoeliminatethedistortingeffectsofhindsight,toreconstructthecircumstancesofcounsel'schallengedconduct,andtoevaluatetheconductfromcounsel'sperspectiveatthetime."Stricklandv.Washington,466U.S.at689,104S. d\ Ct.at2065.Thefactthataparticularstrategyortacticfailedorhurtthedefense,doesnot,standingalone,establishunreasonablerepresentation.However,deferencetomattersofstrategyandtacticalchoicesappliesonlyifthechoicesareinformedonesbaseduponadequatepreparation.Goadv.State,938S.W.2dat369;Hellardv.State, %" 629S.W.2d4,9(Tenn.1982);Alleyv.State,958S.W.2dat149;Cooperv.State,847 `'X $ S.W.2d521,528(Tenn.Crim.App.1992).# X,XXX#XXX X, ` Thetrialjudge'sfindingsoffactonpostconvictionhearingsareconclusiveon ,%* appealunlesstheevidencepreponderatesotherwise.Butlerv.State,789S.W.2dat .', 899;Adkinsv.State,911S.W.2d334,341(Tenn.Crim.App.1995).Thetrialcourts p0h). findingsoffactareaffordedtheweightofajuryverdict,andthiscourtisboundbythetrialcourtsfindingsunlesstheevidenceintherecordpreponderatesagainstthosefindings.Henleyv.State,960S.W.2d572,578(Tenn.1997);Alleyv.State,958 5.4 S.W.2d138,147(Tenn.Crim.App.1997);Dixonv.State,934S.W.2d69,72(Tenn. 706 Crim.App.1996).# X,XXX+#XXX X,Theburdenofestablishingthattheevidencepreponderates  otherwiseisonthepetitioner.Henleyv.State,960S.W.2dat579.# X,XXXG/#XXX X,Ԁ  @QQ+D ANALYSIS  l d  ` Astothetestimonyofthenursepractitioner,thepetitionerhasnotshownthatthetestimonywasinadmissible.Thiscourtreachedthesameconclusionondirectappeal.Statev.Melvin,913S.W.2dat200.Accordingly,thepetitionerhasfailedto   establishprejudice. ` ThefailuretoutilizethetestimonyofDr.Ratnerwasatacticaldecision.Wemaynotsecondguessthisdecision. ` Astotheallegedfailuretodevelopotherpossiblesuspects,thepetitionerhasnotshownanydeficiencyonthepartofcounsel.Furthermore,hehasnotestablishedwhatelsetrialcounselcouldhavedonenorwhathewouldhavediscovered. ` Astothefailuretohaveoneofthevictimsexaminedbyanexpert,thepetitionerhasfailedtoestablishthatanexaminationwouldhaverevealedanyfavorableevidence.SeeBlackv.State,794S.W.2d752,757(Tenn.Crim.App.1990).Inshort, l'd $ thepetitionerhasfailedtoestablishprejudice. ` Astotheallegedfailuretosecuretheservicesofaninvestigatorandproperlyinvestigatethefacts,thepetitioneragainfallsshort.ThepPetitionerhasfailedtoestablishthatafurtherinvestigationwouldrevealfavorableevidence.Thereisnoshowingofprejudice.  4,2  ` Thetrialcourtsfindingsoffactareconclusiveunlesstheevidencepreponderatesotherwise.Theevidencedoesnotpreponderateagainstthefindingsofthetrialcourt.We,therefore,concludethatthepetitionerhasfailedtoestablishineffectiveassistanceofcounsel. ` Basedupontheforegoing,weaffirmthejudgmentofthetrialcourt. `     h      p ______________________________ `     h      p JosephM.Tipton,JudgeCONCUR:______________________________PaulG.Summers,Judge______________________________JoeG.Riley,Judge# X,XXXD0#