ÿWPC% 1# ¾ %É 0(Ïw@÷47KZU:bU:œ D3Ö 0J  0TS 0^§ 0h 0rm 0|ß 0†[ 0á 1uq 0dæU*J B)t DC AMà û- B( fE v~« vÓ) AOüÆK 0D 0@U 0D• D/Ù B˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0  X($¡¡ °P±²D³‹´Eµ¶U·U¸Ó€ÂDÒ 3|xÂ, øð AZ‹"Arial RegularÂ"Arial Regular%%%%'ÿÿdxd2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d!!!!7Border 1dd*,"Cþÿ << Gÿÿ ñÝ ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÔ€ ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€ XÔÌÌOctober€10,€1996ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó d \Ñ\R AØ'\ÑPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  BA Op Geneva ÒÒ  BA Op Geneva Ò*,-/Cþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó00'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÒ € ÒÒ X ÒÓ  ÓÑ  ÑÑ € ÑÓÓÑ\R AØ'\Ñ›Ñ7€ v÷ XXdædÈ7ÑÑ  ÑœÑ  ÑÙ€*ÙßL€#$";+'h|ïÿ¾` ç `€€LßIN›€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OFÏTENNESSEEÌAT€NASHVILLEÌJUNE€1996€SESSIONÌÓ  ÓÌÌÓÓDOWELL€LEWIS€SHANNON,à àà à)à àNO.€01C01„9510„CR„00345Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àAppellantà àà àà àà à)à àWILSON€COUNTYÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àÌV.à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àHON.€JAMES€O.€BOND,€JUDGEÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)ÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEEà àà àà à)à à(Post„Conviction)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àAppelleeà àà àà àà à)ÌÌÌÌÌÌòòFOR€THE€APPELLANTà àà àà àà àFOR€THE€APPELLEEóóÌÌComer€L.€Donnellà àà àà àà àà àCharles€W.€BursonÌDistrict€Public€Defender€à àà àà àà àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌ213€North€Cumberland€Streetà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌPost€Office€Box€888à àà àà àà àNashville,€Tennessee€37243„0493ÌLebanon,€Tennessee€37087à àà àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àWilliam€D.€Bridgesà àÌà àà àœà àà àà à›à àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àœà àà àà àà à›à à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àà àœà àà àà àà à›à àNashville,€Tennessee€37243„0493Ìœà àà à›Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àTom€P.€Thompson,€Jr.Ìœà àà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌ›à àà àà àà àà àà àà à203€Greentop€StreetÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àP.O.€Box€178Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àHartsville,€37074ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àH.€Douglas€Hall€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à111€Cherry€StreetÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àLebanon,€Tennessee€37087ÌÌœ›ÌOPINION€FILED:______ÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌÌWilliam€M.€Barker,€JudgeÌÓ  ÓÓÓòòOPINIONóóÑ€&ÑÇÓ  Óà àThis€is€an€appeal€as€of€right€from€the€Wilson€County€Criminal€Courtððs€dismissalÏwithout€a€hearing€of€Appellantððs€post„conviction€relief€petition.€€Appellant€claims€thatÏhe€was€denied€the€effective€assistance€of€counsel€in€violation€of€both€the€UnitedÏStates€Constitution€and€the€Tennessee€Constitution.€€We€find€that€there€is€no€merit€toÏAppellantððs€claim€and€accordingly€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€dismissal€of€AppellantððsÏpetition.ÌÓ  ÓÌÓ  Óà àOn€June€30,€1991,€Appellant€shot€Jerry€Cowan€in€the€chest€with€a€handgun.€ÏMr.€Cowan€did€not€die€immediately€after€the€gunshot,€but€died€later€on€his€way€to,€orÏat€the€hospital.€€On€July€16,€1992,€Appellant€was€found€guilty€of€first€degree€murderÏand€was€later€sentenced€to€life€imprisonment.€€On€August€2,€1995,€after€havingÏexhausted€all€other€appeals,€Appellant€filed€a€petition€for€post„conviction€relief.€€TheÏpetition€alleged€that€Appellantððs€constitutional€right€to€the€effective€assistance€ofÏcounsel€was€violated€when€his€trial€counsel€stipulated€to€the€Stateððs€autopsy€report.€ÏFollowing€the€judgeððs€preliminary€consideration€of€the€record,€the€petition€wasÏdismissed€because€it€failed€to€show€that€petitioner€was€entitled€to€the€relief€sought.ÌÌà àAppellant€claims€that€the€trial€judge€erroneously€dismissed€his€post„convictionÏpetition.€€This€argument€is€without€merit.Ìà àTennesseeððs€new€and€revised€Post„Conviction€Procedure€Act€becameÏeffective€in€May,€1995.€€This€act€provides€that€when€a€trial€judge€receives€a€post„conviction€petition,€he€or€she€shall€ð ðexamine€it€together€with€all€the€files,€records,Ïtranscripts,€and€correspondence€relating€to€the€judgment€under€attack,€and€enter€anÏorder€in€accordance€with€the€provisions€of€this€section€or€ðð€40„30„207.ðð€€Tenn.€CodeÏAnn.€ðð€40„30„206(a)€(Supp.€1995).€€Subsection€(d)€further€provides:ÌÓÓà8 àThe€petition€must€contain€a€clear€and€specific€statement€of€all€groundsÏupon€which€relief€is€sought,€including€full€disclosure€of€the€factual€basisÏof€those€grounds.€€A€bare€allegation€that€a€constitutional€right€has€beenÏviolated€and€mere€conclusions€of€law€shall€not€be€sufficient€to€warrantÏfurther€proceedings.€€Failure€to€state€a€factual€basis€for€the€groundsÏalleged€shall€result€in€immediate€dismissal€of€the€petition.ÌÓÓÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„206(d)€(Supp.€1995).Ìà àHere,€the€Appellant€alleges€that€his€petition€was€sufficient€to€meet€the€clearÏand€specific€statement€criteria€of€the€Act.€€We€agree.€€œAppellant€marginally›€stated€aÏfactual€basis€for€his€petitionððs€claim€by€alleging€that€his€constitutional€right€to€theÏeffective€assistance€of€counsel€was€violated€when€his€trial€counsel€stipulated€to€theÏstateððs€autopsy€report.€€Ìà àÌà àHowever,€when€a€trial€court€has€received€a€petition€in€proper€form,€it€ð ðshallÏexamine€the€allegations€of€fact€in€the€petition.€€If€the€facts€alleged,€taken€as€true,€fail€toÏshow€that€the€petitioner€is€entitled€to€relief€.€.€.,€the€petition€shall€be€dismissed.ðð€€Tenn.ÍCode€Ann.€ðð€40„30„206(f)€(Supp.€1995).€€In€this€case,€the€inquiry€is€whether€theÏPetitioner€would€be€entitled€to€relief€even€if€his€attorney€was€deficient€in€agreeing€toÏstipulate€to€the€autopsy€report.Ìà àIn€reviewing€an€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€claim,€this€Court€mustÏdetermine€whether€the€advice€given€or€services€rendered€by€the€attorney€are€withinÏthe€range€of€competency€demanded€of€attorneys€in€criminal€cases.€€òòBaxter€v.€Roseóó,Ï523€S.W.2d€930,€936€(Tenn.€1975).€€To€prevail€on€a€claim€of€ineffective€counsel,€aÏpetitioner€ð ðmust€show€that€counselððs€representation€fell€below€an€objective€standardÏof€reasonablenessðð€and€that€this€performance€prejudiced€the€defense.€€There€mustÏbe€a€reasonable€probability€that€but€for€counselððs€error€the€result€of€the€proceedingÏwould€have€been€different.€€òòStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466€U.S.€668,€687„88,€692,Ï694,€104€S.Ct.€2053,€2064,€2067„68,€80€L.Ed.€674€(1984);€òòBest€v.€Stateóó,€708€S.W.2dÏ421,€422€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1985).Ìà àAssuming€arguendo,€that€the€Appellantððs€representation€was€deficient,€weÏwould€still€have€to€inquire€whether€the€representation€prejudiced€the€outcome€of€theÏcase.€€We€find€that€the€Appellantððs€claim€does€not€meet€the€second€prong€of€theÏòòStricklandóó€test.€€Apparently,€the€Appellant€claims€that€if€his€trial€counsel€had€requiredÏthe€medical€examinerððs€testimony€at€œtrial›€rather€than€stipulating€to€the€autopsy€report,Ïthe€medical€examinerððs€testimony€would€have€shown€that€the€immediate€cause€ofÏdeath€was€the€victimððs€loss€of€blood€before€receiving€medical€attention€„„€not€the€factÍthat€Appellant€shot€the€victim.€€This€contention€is€patently€absurd.€€But€for€theÏAppellant€shooting€the€victim,€there€would€have€been€no€loss€of€blood€or€death.Ìà àAccordingly,€the€trial€courtððs€denial€of€the€post„conviction€relief€petition€isÏaffirmed.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àà à__________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àWILLIAM€M.€BARKER,€JUDGEÌÌœCONCUR›€BY:̛̜Ì__________________________ÌJOHN€H.€PEAY,€JUDGEÌÌœÌ__________________________›ÌDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JUDGE