WPC  %Vb\dnXt 04U: 4: # N Y w@a UN 0J 0T9 0^ 0h 0rS 0| 0A 0 1uW 0dU>0B)nDC B AMU*D nU6{ D3v~vb 0@5 AOu 0D D/ B X- -3|x<6X9`("Courier NewTTd6X@DQ@<6X9`("Courier NewTTXXx6X@DQX@( T$  +zAZ"Arial Regularԡ HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLH EeEeӀ(9 Z 6Times New Roman Regular2 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)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<  9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d####7Border 1dd d-$C << G<  9p`(Arial  !  #d#"  ''   YYY FILED'XJuly23,1997CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerk  <  9p`(Courier New%%%%'dxdPtPtHH(FG(HH(d'hStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   h HD: Geneva  h HD: Geneva ("$    -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! . "  ݛ\RA'\       X \RA'\7#dd7ќR&($A1-j|`  `@Rߛ @ ' INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@ ATNASHVILLE` XXJIMMYRAYPOTTER,   )      )  Appellant,    ) C.C.A.NO.01C019702CR00039      )  (No.7310Below) VS.      )      ) FENTRESSCOUNTY STATEOFTENNESSEE,   )      ) TheHon.LeeAsbury  Appellee.    )      ) (DismissalofPostConviction       ) Petition)       )   @ ORDER   ThismatterisbeforetheCourtuponthestatesmotionrequestingthatthejudgmentintheabovestyledcausebeaffirmedpursuanttoRule20,TennesseeCourtofCriminalAppealsRules.Findingthatthetrialcourtproperlydeniedpostconvictionrelief,wegrantthestatesmotiontoaffirmthejudgmentpursuanttoRule20.  Inhissoleissue,thepetitionercontendsthathereceivedineffectiveassistanceofcounsel.Specifically,hecontendsthatcounselwasineffectivebyfailingtoraiseanygroundstosuppressthepetitionerssecondstatementgiventoauthorities.AnAndersbriefwassubmittedonthisissuepursuanttotheUnitedStatesSupremeCourtdecisioninAndersv.California,386U.S.738,87S.Ct.1396,18L.Ed.2d493(1967).)  'Inseekingpostconvictionreliefonthebasisofineffectiveassistanceofcounsel,apetitionermustfirstestablishthattheservicesrenderedortheadvicegivenwasbelow"therangeofcompetencedemandedofattorneysincriminalcases."Baxterv.Rose,523S.W.2d930,936(Tenn.1975).Second,thepetitionermustshowthatthedeficiencies"actuallyhadanadverseeffectonthedefense."Stricklandv.Washington,466U.S.668,693,104S.Ct.2052,5067,80L.Ed.2d674(1984).Theremustbeareasonableprobabilitythatbutforcounselserror,theresultoftheproceedingwouldhavebeendifferent.Id.at694,104S.Ct.at2068.  Whendeterminingwhethercounselsperformancewasdeficient, everyeffort[must]bemadetoeliminatethedistortingeffectsofhindsight,toreconstructthecircumstancesofcounselschallengedconduct,andtoevaluatetheconductfromcounselsperspectiveatthetime.Id.at689,104S.Ct.at2065. Thus,thefactthataparticularstrategyortacticfailedorevenhurtthedefensedoesnot,alone,supportaclaimofineffectiveassistance.Cooperv.State,847S.W.2d521,528(Tenn.Crim.App.1992).Wemustdefertotrialstrategyandtacticalchoiceswhentheyareinformedonesbaseduponadequatepreparation.Id.  Onappeal,thefindingsoffactmadebythepostconvictioncourtareconclusiveandwillnotbedisturbedunlesstheevidencecontainedintherecordpreponderatesagainstthem.Rhodenv.State,816S.W.2d56,60(Tenn.Crim.App.1991).Theburdenisonthepetitionertoshowthattheevidencepreponderatesagainstthosefindings.Clennyv.State,576S.W.2d12,14(Tenn.Crim.App.1978),cert.denied,441U.S.947,99S.Ct.2170,60L.Ed.2d1050(1979).  Thepetitionerarguesthattrialcounselwasineffectivebyfailingtochallengetheintroductionofthepetitionerssecondstatementtoauthorities.Inthisstatement,thepetitioneradmittedtopolicethathehadbeeninthevictimshouse.Trialcounseltestifiedatthepostconvictionhearingthatthissecondstatementwasconsistentwiththeversionofthefactsrelayedtohimbythepetitionerbeforetrial.Moreover,trialcounseltestifiedthatwhilethevictimwasunabletoidentifythepetitionersface,herdescriptionoftheassailantsclothingmatchedthepetitionersclothingatthetimehewasarrestedashortdistancefromthevictimshouse.Assuch,trialcounselindicatedthatthepetitionersstatement,takenshortlyaftertheoffenseandwithoutcounsel,wasconsistentwiththedefensestheorythatthepetitionerhadbeeninthehousebutthathehadbeendrunkandhadthoughtitwashisfriendshouse.Moreover,trialcounseltestifiedthathewasunawareofanybasistosuccessfullychallengetheintroductionofthepetitionersstatement.Thepostconvictioncourtdidnotfindtheperformanceofdefensecounseltobeinadequate,nordiditfindanyreasontosetasidetheverdictandgrantanewtrial.  ThisCourthasreviewedtherecordinthiscase,thepetitionersbrief,andthestatesmotion,andweconcludethatthisisanappropriatecaseforaffirmancepursuanttoRule20.  ITIS,THEREFORE,ORDEREDthatthejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirmedpursuanttoRule20,TennesseeCourtofCriminalAppealsRules.  ENTER,thisthe____dayofJuly,1997.` X X      _____________________________      THOMAST.WOODALL,JUDGECONCUR:_____________________________DAVIDH.WELLES,JUDGE_____________________________JERRYL.SMITH,JUDGE