ÿWPC& …# VUNa %¯ 0(µw@Ý4 1 @ H 0JN 0T˜ 0^ì 0hJ 0r² 0|$ 0†  0& 1u¶ 0d+ U> U6Í B) B,DCI AMŒU*Ùî D3ñf$fŠ 0@ðv~0vÓ® AOÆÐ 0D– D/Ú B ˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡ øEùúeûüDýeþUÿÓ€ »{s 3|xH2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, 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  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Courier New% Line 7 d d$$$$7Border 1dd€-&Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial äÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€"ÔÝ  ÝÔ€(ÔÔ€(ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€(XÔÌÌò òSeptember€30,€1996ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€(ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó%%%%'ÿÿdxd \Ñ\R AØ'\Ñ \Ñ\R AØ'\Ñ("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  ÒPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  BA Op Geneva ÒÒ  BA Op Geneva Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€"ÔÝ  ÝÒ  ÒÒ Ð ÒÓ  ÓÑ ` Ñò òÔ€#ÔÑ\R AØ'\Ñ›œ›ÌÌIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEó óÌÙ€€ÙœßL€')&;+'h|Ý´` Å `€€Lß›Ìò òAT€JACKSONÌÌJANUARY€SESSION,€1996ó óÌÌÌÌÓ  Óò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà àà à€]à àC.C.A.Ï#02C01„9503„CC„00256Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€]Ìà àó óAppellee,à àà àà àà àò ò€]Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€]Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€]à àCROCKETT€CRIMINALÌVS.à àà àà àà àà àà à€]Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à€]à àHON.€DICK€JERMAN,€JR.ÌRICHARD€REDMOND,à àà àà à€]€€€JUDGEÌà àà àà àà àà à€€€€€€]Ìó óà àAppellant.à àà à€€€€€€ò ò]€€€(Post€Conviction€Relief)ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAFFIRMEDó ó€Ìò òÌó óÔ€"ÔÌÌòòÔ€#ÔFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:à àà àà àà àòòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:ÌÌMR.€ORVIL€L.€ORRà àà àà àà àCHARLES€W.€BURSONÌAttorney€at€Lawà àà àà àà àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌ204€S.€College€St.ÌP.O.€Box€351à àà àà àà àà àROBIN€L.€HARRISÌTrenton,€TN€38382à àà àà àà àAttorney€Generalððs€OfficeÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€37243ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àCLAYBURN€L.€PEEPLESÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à28th€Judicial€Districtà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à109€East€First€StreetÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àTrenton,€TN€38382ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àLARRY€HARDISTERÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€DistrictÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAttorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à109€East€First€StreetÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àTrenton,€TN€38382Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED€___________________________ÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌLYNN€W.€BROWN,€SPECIAL€JUDGEà àà àà àà àà àà àà àœÌÌÌÒ   ÒÒ Ð ÒÑ ` ÑÓÓÑ7€v XXdìXXdì7ÑÔ% € ÔÌÌÌÒ  ÒÒ Ð Òò òà@ àOPINIONó óÌÌà àThe€appellant,€Richard€Redmond,€indicted€for€two€counts€ofÏaggravated€assault,€entered€a€plea€of€guilty€in€the€Circuit€CourtÏfor€Crockett€County€to€a€single€offense€of€felony€recklessÏendangerment,€receiving€a€sentence€of€two€years€with€thirty€daysÏto€be€served€in€custody.€€Subsequently€he€filed€a€petition€forÏpost„conviction€relief€alleging€that€his€guilty€plea€was€notÍentered€knowingly,€voluntarily€and€intelligently.€€The€petitionÏalso€alleged€that€he€received€ineffective€assistance€from€hisÏcounsel€at€the€guilty€plea.€€The€trial€court€denied€relief,€fromÏwhich€judgment€the€appellant€has€appealed€by€right€to€this€court.€ÏWe€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌ€€€€€€€"In€post„conviction€relief€proceedings€the€petitioner€hasÏthe€burden€of€proving€the€allegations€in€his€petition€by€aÏpreponderance€of€the€evidence."€€òòMcBee€v.€Stateóó,€655€S.W.2d€191,Ï195€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1983).€€The€findings€of€fact€andÏconclusions€of€law€of€the€trial€court€in€post„conviction€case€areÏafforded€the€weight€of€a€jury€verdict.€€See,€e.g.,€òòCaruthers€v.ÏStateóó,€814€S.W.2d€64,€67€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).€€Furthermore,Ïthe€factual€findings€of€the€trial€court€are€conclusive€on€appealÏunless€the€appellate€court€finds€that€the€evidence€preponderatesÏagainst€the€findings.€€òòButler€v.€Stateóó,€789€S.W.2d€898,€899Ï(Tenn.€1990).€€ÌÌÑ€+ÑÇÑ  Ñà àò òI.€€Constitutional€Validity€of€the€Guilty€Plea.ó óÌà àThe€appellant€contends€that€his€plea€of€guilty€was€notÏentered€knowingly,€intelligently€and€voluntarily.€€SpecificallyÏhe€alleges€that€he€did€not€understand€his€right€against€self„incrimination€as€well€as€his€right€to€confront€and€cross„examineÏthe€state's€witnesses€at€jury€trial.€ÌÌ€€€€€€€The€due€process€clause€of€the€federal€constitutionÏrequires€that€a€plea€of€guilty€to€any€criminal€offense€be€knowingÏand€voluntary.€€òòBoykin€v.€Alabamaóó,€395€U.S.€238,€243,€89€S.€Ct.Ï1709,€1712,€23€L.Ed.2d€274€(1969).€€The€entry€of€a€guilty€pleaÏeffectively€constitutes€a€waiver€of€the€constitutional€rightsÏagainst€compulsory€self„incrimination,€the€right€to€confrontÏone's€accusers,€and€the€right€to€trial€by€jury.€òòIdóó.€€A€knowingÏand€voluntary€plea€requires€the€intentional€relinquishment€orÏabandonment€of€known€rights.€€òòState€v.€Mackeyóó,€553€S.W.2d€337,Ï340€(Tenn.€1977).€The€relinquishment€of€these€constitutionalÏrights€will€not€be€presumed€from€a€silent€record.€òòBoykinóó,€395ÏU.S.€at€243,€89€S.€Ct.€at€1712.€Therefore,€unless€there€is€anÏaffirmative€showing€that€the€plea€was€knowing€and€voluntary,€aÍguilty€plea€may€be€vacated€upon€collateral€attack.€See€òòidóó.;ÏòòMackeyóó,€553€S.W.2d€at€339€to€342.€ÌÌà àHowever,€the€failure€of€the€trial€court€to€advise€aÏdefendant€in€the€guilty€plea€process€of€his€Boykin€rights€may€notÏresult€in€the€overturning€of€a€conviction€if€the€record€reflectsÏthat€the€petitioner€entered€a€voluntary€and€knowing€plea.€ÏòòJohnson€v.€Stateóó€834€S.W.€2d€922,€926€(Tenn.€1992).€The€criticalÏinquiry€is€whether€the€appellant€had€knowledge€of€certain€rightsÏand€waived€those€rights€knowingly€and€voluntarily,€not€whetherÏthe€trial€court€was€the€source€of€that€knowledge.€òòIdóó.ÌÌ€€€€€€€A€petitioner's€claim€that€he€was€not€advised€of€his€òòBoykinóóÏrights€does€not€constitute€sufficient€proof€that€the€plea€was€notÏknowing€and€voluntary.€òòIdóó.€If€the€petitioner€makes€a€prima€facieÏcase€by€showing€that€the€trial€court€failed€to€give€the€mandatedÏadvice,€the€burden€shifts€to€the€State€to€prove€by€clear€andÏconvincing€evidence€that€the€plea€was€knowing€and€voluntary,€"inÏwhich€event€the€plea€will€not€be€disturbed."€òòIdóó.€ÌÌ€€€€€€€If€the€record€reflects€that€the€petitioner€was€aware€ofÏhis€constitutional€rights,€the€petitioner€is€not€entitled€toÏrelief€on€the€ground€that€the€trial€court€failed€to€give€mandatedÏadvice.€òòJohnsonóó,€834€S.W.2d€at€926.€However,€if€the€State€doesÏnot€meet€the€burden€of€showing€that€the€plea€was€enteredÏknowingly€and€voluntarily,€the€petitioner€will€be€entitled€toÏrelief.€òòIdóó.€ÌÌà àIn€this€case€the€appellant€testified€that€at€the€time€of€hisÏguilty€plea€he€did€not€understand€that€he€could€elect€to€go€toÏtrial€and€not€take€the€witness€stand,€and€also€did€not€know€thatÏhe€could€choose€to€not€testify€against€himself.€€He€alsoÏtestified€that€the€right€to€confront€witnesses€against€him€wasÏnot€explained€to€him.€ÌÌà àThe€transcript€of€the€guilty€plea€of€the€petitioner€includesÏthe€following€exchange:Ìà àTHE€COURT:€€I€am€sure€she€[counsel€for€petitioner]€hasÏexplained€them€to€you,€but€let€me€explain€them€to€you,€that€youÏhave€certain€constitutional€rights,€and€by€pleading€guilty€todayÍyou€are€giving€up€certain€rights.€€You€have€the€right€to€remainÏsilent;€the€right€against€self„incrimination€by€answering€myÏquestions.€€By€pleading€guilty€today€you€are€giving€up€the€rightÏto€a€trial€by€jury€to€determine€the€question€of€your€guilt€orÏinnocence.€€You€have€a€jury€case€set€for€Friday€and€you€have€theÏright€to€go€through€that€jury€trial€where€your€lawyer€can€cross„examine€all€witnesses€who€testify€against€you;€you€have€the€rightÏto€subpoena€witnesses€to€testify€in€your€own€behalf.€€You€haveÏthe€right€to€testify€before€the€jury€if€you€chose€[sic]€to€do€so,Ïand€let€the€jury€determine€the€question€of€your€guilty€[sic]€orÏinnocence.€€There€will€be€no€jury€trial€if€you€plead€guilty,€doÏyou€understand€that?Ìà àREDMOND:€€Yes,€sir.Ìà àTHE€COURT:€€You€also€have€the€right€to€appeal€any€decisionÏmade€by€the€court€or€made€by€the€jury€pursuant€to€a€jury€trial.€ÏLikewise,€those€rights€are€waived€by€pleading€guilty.€€Do€youÏunderstand€that:Ìà àREDMOND:€€Yes,€sir.ÌÌà àWe€are€of€the€opinion€that€the€trial€court€therebyÍsufficiently€advised€the€appellant€of€his€right€to€confrontation.€ÏAdditionally,€there€can€be€no€doubt€that€the€appellant€understoodÏthis€right.€€The€petitioner€was€at€the€time€of€his€guilty€pleaÏtwenty„six€years€old.€€He€was€a€high€school€graduate,€capable€ofÏreading€and€writing.€€The€public€defender€described€theÏpetitioner€as€being€very€intelligent€compared€to€most€of€herÏclients.€€His€testimony€in€the€post„conviction€hearing€was€thatÏhe€had€previously€been€charged€with€another€offense€which€wasÏtried€onÑ€,ÑÇÑ7€uXXdìXXdì7Ñtwo€separate€occasions€to€a€jury.€€The€first€trial€resulted€in€aÏmistrial€as€a€result€of€a€hung€jury;€the€appellant€was€found€notÏguilty€in€second€trial.€€He€had€observed€and€confronted€witnessesÏwho€testified€against€him€in€these€trials.ÌÌà àAt€the€hearing€on€his€post„conviction€writ€the€petitionerÏtestified€as€follows:€€"On€the€self€incrimination€deal€actually€IÏwas€under€the€impression€that€self€incrimination€meant€that€I€hadÏto€answer€their€questions.€€I€didn't€know€I€could€elect€to€go€toÏtrial€and€not€take€the€stand€„„€not€to€have€to€testify€against€myÏown€self."ÌÌà àWe€are€of€the€opinion€that€part€of€the€advice€to€theÏpetitioner€by€the€trial€court€regarding€self„incrimination€is€atÏleast€somewhat€confusing.€€The€statement€by€the€court€that€"[y]ouÏhave€the€right€to€remain€silent;€the€right€against€self„incrimination€by€answering€my€questions,"€does€not€inform€theÏpetitioner€whether€his€€right€to€remain€silent€applies€at€juryÏtrial€or€during€the€plea€process.€€However,€the€court's€laterÏadvice€that€the€petitioner€has€the€right€to€choose€to€testifyÍclearly€implies€a€right€not€to€testify.€€Taken€in€its€entirety,Ïwe€are€of€the€opinion€that€the€statements€of€the€trial€court€wereÏsufficient€to€inform€the€appellant€of€his€constitutional€rightÏagainst€self„incrimination.ÌÌà àFurthermore,€the€proof€in€the€writ€hearing€shows€that€priorÏto€his€guilty€plea€the€petitioner€had€been€mailed€a€letter€by€theÏpublic€defender€who€was€appointed€to€represent€him.€€Included€inÏthe€letter€is€the€advice€in€reference€to€a€trial€as€opposed€to€aÏplea€of€guilty:€€"You€have€the€following€rights:€.€.€.€€The€rightÏnot€to€incriminate€yourself;€that€is,€you€don't€have€to€giveÏevidence€against€yourself."€€The€petitioner€admitted€that€he€hadÏseen€such€a€letter,€but€complained€that€no€one€ever€sat€down€andÏexplained€it€to€him.€€We€are€of€the€opinion€that€to€a€person€ofÏthe€appellant's€intelligence,€this€statement€needs€noÏexplanation.€€The€assistant€public€defender€who€represented€theÏappellant€at€his€guilty€plea€had€a€firm€recollection€of€the€factsÏand€certain€problems€with€the€case,€but€no€distinct€recollectionÏof€explaining€constitutional€rights€to€the€appellant.€€CounselÏdid€testify€that€"[w]e€always€go€over€what€his€rights€are€beforeÍhe€entered€the€plea."€€The€trial€court€at€the€conclusion€of€theÏwrit€hearing€found€the€appellant's€statements€that€he€did€notÏunderstand€these€constitutional€rights€to€be€untruthful.€€We€haveÏexamined€the€record€of€appellant's€testimony€and€find€repeatedÏevasiveness€and€testimony€in€contradiction€to€other€proof€in€theÏcase.€€We€accept€this€finding€of€the€trial€court€as€we€would€aÏjury€verdict.ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€found€that€the€appellant's€guilty€plea€wasÏentered€knowingly€and€voluntarily.€We€conclude€that€the€trialÏcourt's€acceptance€of€the€appellant's€guilty€plea€complied€withÏthe€requirements€of€òòBoykin€v.€Alabamaóó,€395€U.S.€238,€23€L.€Ed.€2dÏ274,€89€S.€Ct.€1709€(1969),€and€òòState€v.€Mackeyóó,€553€S.W.2d€337Ï(Tenn.€1977).€The€evidence€does€not€preponderate€against€theÏtrial€court's€finding€that€the€appellant's€plea€was€knowing€andÏvoluntary.ÌÌÌÌà àò òII.€€INEFFECTIVE€ASSISTANCE€OF€COUNSELó ó€Ìà àThe€petitioner€alleges€that€the€assistance€of€his€appointedÏcounsel€was€so€defective€as€to€require€reversal€of€hisÏconviction.€€In€order€for€the€petitioner€to€be€granted€relief€onÏthe€grounds€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel,€he€mustÏestablish€that€the€advice€given€or€the€services€rendered€were€notÏwithin€the€range€of€competence€demanded€of€attorneys€in€criminalÏcases€and€that,€but€for€his€counsel's€deficient€performance,€theÏresult€of€his€trial€would€have€been€different.€òòStrickland€v.ÏWashingtonóó,€466€U.S.€668,€693,€80€L.€Ed.€2d€674,€104€S.€Ct.€2052Ï(1984);€òòBaxter€v.€Roseóó,€523€S.W.2d€930,€936€(Tenn.€1975).€ThisÏtwo„part€standard,€as€it€applies€to€guilty€pleas,€is€met€when€theÏpetitioner€establishes€that,€but€for€his€counsel's€errors,€heÏwould€not€have€pled€guilty€and€would€have€insisted€on€going€toÏtrial.€òòHill€v.€Lockhartóó,€474€U.S.€52,€53,€88€L.€Ed.€2d€203,€106ÏS.€Ct.€366€(1985).€€ÌÌà àMuch€of€appellant's€argument€regarding€this€issue€is€aÏreiteration€of€the€constitutionality€of€his€guilty€plea,€withÏwhich€we€dealt€above.€€The€record€indicates€that€the€appellantÏwas€informed€of€his€constitutional€rights€by€the€public€defender,Íboth€by€letter€and€by€consultation.€€The€appellant€also€allegesÏthat€his€appointed€counsel€did€not€inform€him€of€the€elements€ofÏthe€offense€of€reckless€endangerment€to€which€he€pleaded€guilty,Ïa€lesser€offense€than€aggravated€assault€for€which€he€wasÏindicted.€Appellant's€appointed€counsel€testified€that€sheÏconsulted€with€him€on€three€different€dates€as€well€as€on€theÏdate€of€guilty€plea.€€Counsel€testified€that€the€appellant€wasÏvery€aware€of€his€constitutional€rights,€was€informed€of€theÏelements€of€the€offense€with€which€he€was€charged,€and€appearedÏto€be€very€intelligent€and€able€to€assist€in€his€defense.€€TheÏappellant€was€not€informed€of€the€elements€of€recklessÏendangerment.€Appellantððs€counsel€did,€however,€advise€him€inÏdetail€regarding€the€consequences€of€a€guilty€plea.€A€particularÏproblem€with€the€case€was€that€the€district€attorney€wasÏattempting€to€withdraw€his€offer€of€a€plea€to€the€lesser€offenseÏbefore€the€plea€was€entered.€€The€record€does€not€contain€anyÏinformation€regarding€the€circumstances€of€the€offense€other€thanÏthe€affidavits€for€the€issuance€of€the€arrest€warrants.€€There€isÏno€indication€that€the€affidavits€were€considered€by€the€trialÏcourt€in€the€writ€hearing.€€Also,€the€appellant€does€not€complainÍabout€the€preparation€done€by€his€appointed€counsel€inÏinvestigating€the€case.€€ÌÌà àThe€trial€court€concluded€that€the€proof€did€not€support€theÏallegation€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel.€€On€this€recordÏwe€are€unable€to€say€that€the€proof€in€this€case€preponderatesÏagainst€that€conclusion.€ÌÌà àWe€find€the€issues€presented€for€our€review€to€be€withoutÏmerit.€€The€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.€€Ì€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà à__________________________________ÓÓÌà àà àà àà àà àà àLynn€W.€Brown,€Special€JudgeÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ_______________________________ÌDavid€G.€Hayes,€JudgeÌÌÌÌ_______________________________ÌJerry€L.€Smith,€JudgeÌ€ÌÌÌÌ›