’WPCē 7# U> %[ 0ķaUBN4¤n­³U:`šw@¢ D3ā 0J 0T_ 0^³ 0h 0ry 0|ė 0†g 0ķ 1u} 0dņ 0@V B– U6³ U.é U* B)A AQj Ę» 0D 0DÅ D/  B8DCU 01˜ AMÉ‚ 0D˜ŗÜv~–vÓ˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLHĪ<čĄ( 9Z &Courier RegularX(ÅÕŠ$””Ń  ŃŃ7€'CXXdČXXdČ7ŃŃ  ŃÓ  ÓÓiU°X` ø hĄpČ xŠ (#€%Ų'0*ˆ,ą.813č5@8˜:š<H? A°œXiÓ<ž6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiäzz!3|x\«<ž6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXxž6X@ÉJQX@,†r‰AZ‹"Arial Regular HIJKLMDNODPӀ\!!!!'’’dxd2 ’’0Indent1Ō2ŌŌ3  Ō2" ’’0Indent2ą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō2, ’’0Indent3ą0 ąą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō26 ’’0Indent4ą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō2@ ’’0Indent5ą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō2J ’’0Indent6ą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō2T ’’0Indent7ą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō2^ ’’0Indent8ą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąą0 ąŌ2ŌŌ3  Ō ’’?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ’’8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ("’’$££Ņ  ŅŅ  Ņ d< Œ 9p`(Courier New< Œ 9p`(Courier< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d*+ ,-Cž’<< C’’ƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3Æ$¢¢Ż ƒ!ŻŻ  Ż($$””ņ ņŚ  Ś1Ś  Śó ó..'÷’ dxdü’P Pd((((7Border 1dd(į(3Œ($¤¤Ż ƒÕŠ!ŻŃ  ŃŃ7€;ÄXXdČdČ7ŃŃ  ŃÓ  ÓÓiU°X` ø hĄpČ xŠ (#€%Ų'0*ˆ,ą.813č5@8˜:š<H? A°œXiÓŻ  Żą ` ąņņŚ  Ś0Ś  Śóó* /Cž’ << G’’ xŻ ƒ!ŻŃ  ŃŃ#€d#ŃŌ€%ŌŃ  ŃŃ#€d#ŃŃ  ŃÓ` °˜XÓŻ  ŻŻ ƒ+"ŻŻ  ŻŌ€'ŌŌ€'ŌÓ  ÓŌ YYY ŌFILEDŌ€'XŌĢĢņ ņMay€7,€1997ĢĢCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ĢŌ€'ōŌAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó(#Ć$ņņŚ  Ś0Ś  Śóó °Ż ƒ!ŻŃ#€d#ŃŌ€%ŌŃ  ŃŃ#€d#ŃŃ  ŃÓ` °˜XÓŻ  ŻŻ ƒ0$Żą ąņņŚ  ŚŚ  ŚóóŻ  ŻŌ€'ŌŌ€'ōŌ€€At€the€relevant€times€for€this€case,€Rule€49(c),€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.,€provided€in€part:€š šThe€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ļclerk€shall€endorse€upon€every€pleading€and€other€papers€filed€with€the€clerk€in€a€proceeding€the€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ļdate€and€hour€of€the€filing.šš€€This€reflects€that€the€receipt€of€the€pleading€by€the€clerk€constitutes€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ļthe€filing€and€not€the€clerkššs€endorsement€of€the€date€and€time.ĢPtPtHHŚ(’į’āłFG(üHHŚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆ ĆĆ ĆĆ ĆĆ ĆĆ ĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆĆŠ ŠŠHHŠŠ  ŠŠ2ŠŠ’’øę$’ŠŠHHŠŠŠŠŠŠŠŠ  ŠŠ ŠŠ ŠŃŃŃGenevaŃŃ ŃŃ € ŃŃ<Px–ČŃŅŅŅ443!#4ŅŅ$ *$ŅŅ$*$ŅŅ ’KK ŅŅ  Geneva ŅŅ  Geneva ŅÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßŃGenevaŃŃ ŃŅ  h HD: Geneva ŅŅ  h HD: Geneva ŅŻ ƒ!ŻŌ . ŌŌ€%ŌŃ  ŃŃ#€&&Xd#ŃŃ#€&&Xd#ŃŃ  ŃÓ` °˜XÓŻ  Ż›Ń  ŃŃ Ü ŃŅ  ŅŅ ° ŅŅ  ŅŅ X ŅŃ\R AŲ'\ŃÓÓŃ\R AŲ'\ŃŌ€'ŌŃ7€ ÜØ XXdęXXdČ7ќŁ€*ŁßR€12/A1-j|Ÿżņ` Å `€€@’Rß›Ž ŽĢą@ ąIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEĢą@ ąAT€JACKSONą@ ą€€€€€€€€€Ģą ąą ą€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€APRIL€1997€SESSIONĢĢÓÓSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,ą ąą ą€€€€€ą ą)Ģ€ą ąą ąą ąą ą€€€€ą ą)€€ą ąĢą ąAppellee,ą ąą ąą ą)ą ąNo.€02C01„9502„CR„00051Ģą ą€€€€€ą ąą ą€€ą ąą ą)Ģą ąą ąą ąą ąą ą)ą ąShelby€CountyĢv.ą ąą ąą ąą ąą ą)€€€€€€€€€Ģą ąą ąą ąą ąą ą)ą ąHonorable€L.€T.€Lafferty,€JudgeĢą ąą ąą ąą ąą ą)ĢELWIN€SOUTH,ą ąą ąą ąą ą)ą ą(Motion€for€Reduction€of€Sentence)Ģą ąą ąą ąą ąą ą)€€€€€€€€Ģą ąAppellant.ą ąą ąą ą)Ģą ąą ąą ąą ąĢĢņņFor€the€Appellantóó:ą ąą ąą ąą ąņņFor€the€Appelleesóó:ĢĢElwin€N.€South,€Sr.,€ņņProóó€ņņSeó󀀀€€ą ąą ąCharles€W.€BursonĢL.C.R.C.F.€Rt.€1,€Box€330,ą ąą ąą ąAttorney€General€of€TennesseeĢTiptonville,€TN€38079ą ąą ąą ąą ąandą ąą ąą ąą ąĢą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąEllen€H.€PollackĢą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąAssistant€Attorney€General€of€TennesseeĻą ąą ąą ąą ąą ą450€James€Robertson€Parkwayą ąą ąĢą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąNashville,€TN€37243„0493ĢĢą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąJohn€W.€Pierotti,€Jr.Ģą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąDistrict€Attorney€GeneralĢą ąą ąą ąą ąą ą201€Poplar€AvenueĢą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąMemphis,€TN€38103„1947Ģą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąĢĢĢĢĢĢĢĢOPINION€FILED:____________________ĢĢĢREVERSED€AND€REMANDEDĢĢJoseph€M.€TiptonĢJudgeĢĢĢĢĢ€ą8 ąĢĢĢĢĢą@ ąņņņ ņO€P€I€N€I€O€Nóóó óĢĢą ąĢĢÓÓą ąThe€defendant,€Elwin€South,€appeals€as€of€right€from€the€Shelby€œCountyĻCriminal›€Courtššs€order€denying€his€motion€for€reduction€of€sentence.€€Pursuant€to€guiltyĻpleas,€the€defendant€was€convicted€of€three€counts€of€attempted€aggravated€rape,€aĻClass€B€felony,€and€sentenced€to€three€concurrent€eight„year€terms€of€confinement.€ĻThe€issue€presented€for€our€review€is€whether€the€trial€court€erred€by€denying€theĻdefendantššs€motion€for€reduction€of€sentence€because€it€was€untimely€filed.€€TheĻunderlying€question€in€this€appeal€is€when€did€the€defendant€file€his€motion.€€WeĻreverse€the€trial€court€and€remand€the€case€for€reconsideration€in€light€of€this€opinion.€€ĢĢą ąThe€defendantššs€sentences€were€imposed€on€August€12,€1993,€with€theĻtrial€court€denying€any€type€of€alternative€sentencing.€€The€defendant€filed€a€motion€toĻreduce€his€sentences,€alleging€serious€medical€problems,€including€prostate€cancer,Ļand€the€need€to€support€his€wife,€given€the€fact€that€his€social€security€income€endedĻwhile€he€was€in€prison.€ĢĢą ąPursuant€to€Rule€35,€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.,€a€trial€court€has€the€authority€toĻreduce€a€defendantššs€sentence€š šupon€application€filed€within€120€days€after€the€dateĻthe€sentence€is€œimposed€.€.€.€.š𛀀The€Committee€Comment€to€the€rule€states€that€the€timeĻperiod€may€not€be€tolled€or€extended.€€However,€we€believe€that€the€trial€court€recordsĻand€the€appellate€court€records€in€this€case,€of€which€we€take€judicial€notice,€indicateĻthat€the€problems€in€this€case€may€not€be€of€the€defendantššs€doing€œso›€that€justice€couldĻrequire€consideration€of€the€merits€of€his€motion€by€the€trial€court.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņState€v.€DarrellĻTiptonóó,€No.€03C01„9305„CR„00142,€Carter€County,€slip€op.€at€2€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€Nov.Ļ22,€1993)€(š šIt€would€be€a€travesty€of€justice€to€hold€a€ņņproóó€ņņseóó€appellant€.€.€.€accountableĻfor€an€oversight,€in€the€office€of€œthe›€Court€Clerk,€not€of€his€doing.šš)ĢĢą ąOn€May€9,€1996,€nunc€pro€nunc€to€March€8,€1995,€the€trial€court€enteredĻan€order€stating€that€it€denied€the€defendantššs€Rule€35€motion€on€March€8,€1995,Ļwithout€a€hearing€because€the€motion€was€untimely€filed€and€the€trial€court€did€notĻotherwise€have€jurisdiction€over€the€defendant.€€The€order€stated€that€the€ShelbyĶCounty€Criminal€Court€Clerk€š šapparently€failed€to€notify€the€petitioner€of€the€CourtĻruling.šš€€The€trial€court€acknowledged€that€the€defendant€claims€his€motion€was€filed€inĻNovember€1993,€but€it€concluded€that€š šthe€Clerkššs€records€reflect€the€motion€wasĻreceived€in€that€office€on€February€20,€1995,€and€formally€filed€on€February€22,€1995.šš€ĻAppendix€A€to€the€order€includes€a€copy€of€the€defendantššs€motion€marked€š šFILED€2„22„95"€by€a€deputy€court€clerk€and€a€copy€of€an€envelope€cover€reflecting€a€mailingĻfrom€the€defendant€to€the€trial€court€clerkššs€office€and€containing€a€postal€stamp€datedĻš šFEB€20€šš95"€and€another€stamp€stating,€š šDELIVERED€FEB.€21€1995.šš€ĢĢą ąThe€defendant€filed€a€motion€to€reconsider€in€which€he€alleged€that€heĻmailed€his€Rule€35€motion€by€registered/certified€mail€on€November€24,€1993,€and€thatĻthe€trial€court€clerkššs€office€received€it€on€November€29,€1993,€well€within€the€œ120„day›Ļlimit.€€He€attached€a€copy€of€a€registered/certified€mail€receipt€that€reflects€that€anĻarticle€addressed€to€š šMs.€Minerva€Johnican€Clerk,€201€Poplar€Ave.,€Mphs.,€TN.€38103ššĻwas€received€by€a€person€under€the€signature€of€š šGaines€Crim.€Court€Clerk.šš€€We€alsoĻnote€that€the€defendantššs€signature€on€his€Rule€35€motion€was€notarized€on€NovemberĻ24,€1993.€€The€trial€court€denied€the€motion€to€reconsider€for€the€same€reason€that€itĻdenied€the€motion€for€reduction.€€ĢĢą ąOn€appeal,€the€defendant€continues€to€assert€that€his€motion€was€filedĻtimely.€€He€argues€that€he€has€diligently€pursued€his€motion€and€that€he€should€not€beĶpenalized€for€circumstances€outside€of€his€control.€€In€response,€the€state€counters€withĻbasic€arguments.€€It€simply€says€that€the€motion€was€filed€on€February€22,€1995,Ļthereby€being€outside€the€120„day€limitation.€€It€then€argues€that€even€if€the€motionĻwere€timely,€the€trial€court€was€authorized€to€exercise€its€discretion€in€denying€theĻmotion€without€a€hearing€and€the€petitioner€has€not€shown€that€the€interest€of€justiceĻwould€be€served€by€modifying€his€sentences.€€ĢĢą ąWe€believe€that€the€stateššs€arguments€are€unconvincing.€€First,€weĻquestion€the€trial€courtššs€determination€of€disputed€facts€without€the€benefit€of€anĻevidentiary€hearing.€€When€the€defendant€alleges€that€he€has€timely€filed€the€motionĻand€produces€supporting€documents€that€on€their€face€reflect€a€timely€filing,€the€trialĻcourt€should€not€resolve€a€contested€factual€issue€without€giving€the€parties€anĻopportunity€to€present€their€respective€cases.€€ĢĢą ąIn€any€event,€we€are€inclined€to€believe€that€the€defendantššs€claims€areĻsupported€by€the€records€before€this€court.€€Aside€from€the€date€of€the€defendantššsĻnotarized€signature€on€the€motion€and€the€date€on€the€registered/certified€mail€receipt,Ļour€courtššs€records€reflect€that€it€is€highly€improbable€that€the€defendant€submitted€hisĻRule€35€motion€in€February€1995.€€On€February€23,€1995,€the€appellate€court€clerk€inĻJackson€marked€as€filed€a€pleading€styled€Application€for€Audita€Querela€Writ€ofĻCertiorari€that€complains€about€the€fact€the€Shelby€County€Criminal€Court€has€failed€toĶact€on€his€Motion€for€Reduction€of€Sentence€filed€in€November€1993.€€The€documentsĻreflect€that€the€defendantššs€signature€on€the€pleading€was€notarized€on€February€17,Ļ1995.€€The€Applicationššs€attachments€include€the€defendantššs€Motion€for€Reduction€ofĻSentence€and€a€copy€of€the€November€29,€1993,€registered/certified€mail€receipt.€€TheĻApplication€also€includes€a€claim€by€the€defendant€that€he€inquired€by€letter€in€1994Ļabout€the€status€of€his€motion.€€The€Application€seeks€to€require€the€trial€court€to€act€onĻthe€merits€of€the€defendantššs€motion.€ĢĢÓ#` °hu•X#Óą ąIn€other€words,€the€timing€of€the€Application€filed€with€this€court€and€itsĻallegations€do€not€lend€themselves€easily€in€support€of€the€trial€courtššs€conclusion€thatĻthe€defendantššs€Rule€35€motion€was€first€received€in€the€trial€court€clerkššs€office€onĻFebruary€20,€1995.€€Moreover,€as€previously€indicated,€if€the€defendantššs€pleadingsĻand€exhibits€in€the€trial€court€are€taken€as€true,€then€he€has€shown€that€he€filed€hisĻmotion€on€November€29,€1993,€when€the€registered/certified€mail€receipt€was€signedĻby€a€deputy€clerk.× ƒ4 ××  ׀€What€happened€with€the€motion€after€that€would€not€be€of€theĻdefendantššs€doing.€€In€any€event,€the€record€is€such€that€we€believe€that€a€dismissal€forĻuntimeliness€would€have€to€result€œfrom›€further€hearing.ĢĢą ąAs€for€the€stateššs€claim€that€the€defendant€has€made€no€showing€that€theĻinterests€of€justice€would€be€served€by€a€sentence€reduction,€we€do€not€believe€it€is€ourĻobligation€to€undertake€that€analysis.€€First,€it€was€never€undertaken€by€the€trial€court,Ļthe€forum€with€the€primary€authority€and€duty€to€act€on€the€merits€œof€the›€Rule€35€motion.€ĻIts€discretion€relative€to€such€a€œmotion,€though,›€does€œnot›€include€not€acting€on€theĻmerits.€€Second,€the€records€before€us€are€insufficient€to€warrant€a€ruling€either€way.€€InĻfact,€save€the€Rule€35€motion€and€subsequent€pleadings,€none€of€the€case€pleadingsĻand€papers€that€are€required€to€be€sent€as€part€of€the€record€on€appeal,€ņņseeóó€T.R.A.P.Ļ25(a)€and€(b),€are€before€us.€€Thus,€the€trial€court,€being€aware€of€the€circumstances€ofĻthe€cases€in€which€the€defendant€seeks€relief,€remains€the€best€forum€at€this€time€toĻassess€the€relative€merits€of€the€defendantššs€motion.€€ĢĢą ąIn€conclusion,€we€hold€that€the€trial€court€should€not€have€dismissed€theĻdefendantššs€Rule€35€motion€for€untimeliness€under€the€record€before€us.€€If€the€issue€ofĻtimeliness€is€still€contested,€the€trial€court€has€the€authority€to€conduct€an€appropriateĻhearing€for€resolution€of€the€matter.€€If€such€a€hearing€is€unnecessary,€the€trial€court€œĒshall›€rule€on€the€merits€of€the€defendantššs€Rule€35€motion.€€The€order€of€the€trial€court€isĻreversed€and€the€case€is€remanded€for€reconsideration€in€light€of€this€opinion.€€ĢĢÓÓą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ą_____________________________Ģą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąą ąJoseph€M.€Tipton,€JudgeĢĢCONCUR:ĢĢĢĢ____________________________ĢDavid€G.€Hayes,€JudgeĢĢĢĢ____________________________ĢWilliam€M.€Barker,€Judge