ÿWPC¬ ×LÖ,³â'M87~ú¬w£³F(¥ORUéäùÀ·BúÎ*9×Ì/Èð!C´¾@[§Œy'Ìw=º »@òã°z\â“§ÅÿÅ_ø™Š¸Ö„r•ÎÜ S^#…§CŒCÊ™uB} IëÏ¥€¦(TÇ$#³(Þa+>ô2V·çÎ<4¿¶ÂçJêªM¿¶ICå#T#¦Äš±f4M+Ð$MÚ1ó¶q®}…Ö8‰¬®gO'u¶ã3¡iF[o{ÍÖôѵ f݈ÉmAz±Óf TçâßÐ1ó`ª“&9iÍK9'}NÛ ˜±¿’) Öî,ƒ!PE3»ûqùî8;À†°êͱLÃ˳Ëvu± ¼š!ÎY^5‰ÌŒ¶†á(=”sV¸oȽ³Þ†ªøŽÕ²ßÅÞº¼9OïEå¸h¨˜^e0%؆&8¡„Nnc²×…¡M´hNR³<ÈÇÌå:²RÞeE]AâFóPn*À²h ¼^KSâØµ;±»ˆ=ÅKVûÆùÿÅÈ‚æÙŒ³c†#yãŒÓz6ß„°ºjb|·Ä”PŠhqV7Á˜xz Þ°Sf !Zµñ•k§ƒ¨å C÷Á_fs+îW²ð…UBF %ˆ U.Ž ¼ nXÌ 0P$ 4t ˆ 0” 0D$ w@h U:¨ U:â  U:999999999999999999999 Bssssss D3 0DÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà AOÆVV 0D D/` B<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpi X%ä2¼A`ArialTT3|Xk«<þ6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXxþ6X@ÉJQX@%ä2¼A`ArialTTt10cpiXXXä2¼P±ŠQXP((­À$¡¡ÒD°ÒÒ¦°ÒÓ  Óýhµ&(D(3¾Á$¤¤Ý ƒ­À!ÝÒD°ÒÒ¦°ÒÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà œ àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó WDXEYZD[\]V^D_`Ó€,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regularg"Arial Regular Ô€X´½XX XÔÔ€î^îXX´½ÔÓ  ÓÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€ ÷îî^ÔÐ  ÐÌò òJuly€8,€1999Ð ¶¶ ÐÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€ô¸É ô ÷ÔAppellate€CourtÐ –– ÐClerkó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular d$$$$'ÿÿdxd(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ­À!ÝÒD°ÒÒ¦°ÒÓ  ÓÝ  Ýñ`ñ›ñ`ñÑ` °ÑÑX°ÑÑ7€‚OXXdÈXXdð7ÑÑ  ÑÑTR[¤ AØ'Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÔ€XɬXX XÔñ`ñßr€*<,(j 8 `€€@Ef  tt0"R` ¨Ørß›ñ`ñà œ àà ô àò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÐ `  ÐÌà@]]:;àAT€KNOXVILLEˆÌÌà@ZZ8;àJUNE€1999€SESSIONˆÌÌÌÌó óÌò òJAMES€SPRAGUE,à ¤ à€à ü àà T à)ó óÐ Ðp  Ðà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àò ò)ó óà ¬ àò òC.C.A.€NO.€03C01„9805„CR„00194ó óÐ À`  Ðà œ àà ô àAppellant,à ¤ àò ò€€€€€à ü àà T à)Ð °P  Ðà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T à)à ¬ àKNOX€COUNTYó óÐ  @  ÐVS.à œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àò ò)Ð 0  Ðà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T à)à ¬ àHON.€RICHARD€BAUMGARTNER,Ð €  ÐSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à ¤ à€à ü àà T à)à ¬ àJUDGEÐ p Ðà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T à)Ìà œ àà ô àó óAppellee.ò òà ¤ àà ü àà T à)à ¬ àó ó(Post„Conviction)ò òÐ Pð Ðó óÌÌÌòòFOR€THE€APPELLANT:óóà ¤ àà ü àà T à€€€€€òòà ¬ àFOR€THE€APPELLEE:óóÐ ° Ðà œ àÌÌò òLAURA€RULE€HENDRICKSà ü àà T àà ¬ àPAUL€G.€SUMMERSÐ à€ Ðó ó606€West€Main€St.,€Suite€350ò òà ü àà T àà ¬ àó óAttorney€General€&€Reporterò òÐ Ð p Ðó óP.O.€Box€84ò òÐ À!` Ðó óKnoxville,€TN€€37901„0084ò òà ü àà T àà ¬ àR.€STEPHEN€JOBEÐ °"P Ðó óà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ àAsst.€Attorney€Generalò òÐ  #@ Ðó óà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ àCordell€Hull€Bldg.,€2nd€Fl.Ð $0 Ðà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àò òà T àó óà ¬ à425€Fifth€Ave.,€NorthÐ €%  Ðà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ àNashville,€TN€€37243„0493Ìà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ àà  àÌò òà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ àRANDALL€NICHOLSó óÐ P(ð! Ðà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ àDistrict€Attorney€General€Ìà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àÌà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ àò òSCOTT€GREENó óÐ  +À!$ Ðà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ àAsst.€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ à400€Main€Ave.Ìà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ àKnoxville,€TN€€37902Ìà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ àà  àÌÌÌà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ àÌà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àÌOPINION€FILED:òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÐ 30*- ÐÌÌÌò òAFFIRMEDó óÐ P7ð-1 ÐÌÌò òJOHN€H.€PEAY,ó óÐ  :À04 ÐJudgeÌÐ  < 26 ÐѰXÑÑ7€ ɬ XXdðXXdÈ7ÑÓ  Óà@‡‡:;àò òòòÔ‡¼‡|¼XXɬÔO€P€I€N€I€O€NÔ#†XɬX¼¼‡|\#ԈР`  ÐÌÌó óóóÌÓÓà œ àà ô àThe€petitioner€pled€guilty€to€two€counts€of€sexual€exploitation€of€a€minor€andÏentered€a€best€interest€plea€to€one€count€of€aggravated€sexual€battery.€€Pursuant€to€aÏplea€bargain,€he€was€sentenced€to€a€term€of€one€year€on€each€count€of€sexualÏexploitation€of€a€minor€and€eight€years€for€aggravated€sexual€battery.€€These€sentencesÏwere€to€run€concurrently.€€His€subsequent€petition€for€post„conviction€relief€was€deniedÏby€the€post„conviction€court€after€an€evidentiary€hearing.€€The€petitioner€now€appeals€andÏcontends€that€he€did€not€receive€the€effective€assistance€of€counsel€and€that€his€guiltyÏpleas€were€not€knowing€or€voluntary.€€After€a€review€of€the€record€and€applicable€law,€weÏfind€no€merit€to€the€petitionerððs€contentions€and€thus€affirm€the€denial€of€his€post„¼conviction€petition.ÌÌà œ àà ô àUnder€the€Post„Conviction€Procedure€Act€of€1995,€the€petitioner€has€theÏburden€of€proving€the€factual€allegations€in€his€or€her€petition€by€clear€and€convincingÏevidence.€€T.C.A.€ðð€40„30„210(f).€€Furthermore,€the€factual€findings€of€the€trial€court€inÏhearings€ð ðare€conclusive€on€appeal€unless€the€evidence€preponderates€against€theÏjudgment.ðð€€òòState€v.€Bufordóó,€666€S.W.2d€473,€475€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1983).€€Ð f) " ÐÌà œ àà ô àIn€reviewing€the€petitionerððs€Sixth€Amendment€claim€of€ineffectiveÏassistance€of€counsel,€this€Court€must€determine€whether€the€advice€given€or€servicesÏrendered€by€the€attorney€are€within€the€range€of€competence€demanded€of€attorneys€inÏcriminal€cases.€€òòBaxter€v.€Roseóó,€523€S.W.2d€930,€936€(Tenn.€1975).€€To€prevail€on€aÐ Æ2f), Ðclaim€of€ineffective€counsel,€a€petitioner€ð ðmust€show€that€counselððs€representation€fellÏbelow€an€objective€standard€of€reasonablenessðð€and€that€this€performance€prejudiced€theÏdefense.€€There€must€be€a€reasonable€probability€that€but€for€counselððs€error€the€resultÏof€the€proceeding€would€have€been€different.€€òòStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466€U.S.€668,Ð F:æ04 Ð687„88,€692,€694€(1984);€òòBest€v.€Stateóó,€708€S.W.2d€421,€422€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1985).€Ð :¾06 ÐTo€satisfy€the€requirement€of€prejudice,€the€petitioner€would€have€had€to€demonstrate€aÏreasonable€probability€that,€but€for€counselððs€errors,€he€would€not€have€pled€guilty€andÏwould€have€insisted€on€going€to€trial.€€òòSeeóó€òòHill€v.€Lockartóó,€474€U.S.€52,€59€(1985);Ð ø ˜ ÐòòBankston€v.€Stateóó,€815€S.W.2d€213,€215€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991).Ð Äd Ðà œ àà ô àÌà œ àà ô àThe€petitioner€first€contends€that€his€attorney,€Raymond€Shirley,€wasÏineffective€in€that€he€failed€to€adequately€investigate€the€facts€of€the€case€and€witnessesÏto€the€case.€€The€proof€at€the€post„conviction€hearing€established€that€Mr.€Shirley€triedÏto€locate€several€witnesses€mentioned€by€the€petitioner.€€However,€he€was€unable€toÏlocate€these€witnesses€by€telephone€or€at€the€address€given€by€the€petitioner.€€AccordingÏto€Mr.€Shirley,€these€witnesses€ð ðwere€gone,€disappeared.ðð€€One€of€the€witnesses€cameÏto€Mr.€Shirleyððs€office€and€he€was€able€to€take€her€statement.€€Mr.€Shirley€testified€that€heÏð ðchecked€everything€outðð€that€the€petitioner€gave€him€and€ð ðnothing€panned€out.ðð€€Mr.ÏShirley€stated€that€he€met€with€the€petitioner€ð ðmany€timesðð€and€ð ðcommunicated€with€[theÏpetitioner]€about€what€[he]€was€learning€and€the€investigation€from€the€District€Attorney.ðð€ÏMr.€Shirley€further€testified€that€on€the€petitionerððs€trial€day,€he€was€prepared€for€a€trial€ifÏthe€petitioner€decided€not€to€plead€guilty.€€ÌÌà œ àà ô àThis€Court€has€previously€held,€ð ðWhen€a€petitioner€contends€that€trialÏcounsel€failed€to€discover,€interview,€or€present€witnesses€in€support€of€his€defense,€theseÏwitnesses€should€be€presented€by€the€petitioner€at€the€evidentiary€hearing.ðð€€òòBlack€v.Ð P-ð#( ÐStateóó,€794€S.W.2d€752,€757€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990).€€The€petitioner€offered€no€proof€onÐ /¼%* Ðthis€issue€other€than€his€own€testimony.€€The€petitioner€has€failed€to€prove€by€clear€andÏconvincing€evidence€that€Mr.€Shirley€did€not€adequately€investigate€the€facts€of€andÏwitnesses€to€this€case€or€that€he€was€prejudiced€by€any€alleged€inadequacy.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€atÐ €4 +0 Ð758.€€€As€such,€this€contention€is€without€merit.ÌÌà œ àà ô àThe€petitioner€further€contends€that€he€received€the€ineffective€assistanceÐ ä9„06 Ðof€counsel€because€Mr.€Shirley€ð ðdid€not€recognize€[the€petitionerððs]€increasing€irrationalityÏon€the€day€of€trial.ðð€€The€petitioner€claims€that€this€ð ðirrationalityðð€was€a€result€of€hisÏhypoglycemia,€a€condition€he€was€unaware€of€at€the€time€of€his€guilty€plea,€and€his€allergyÏto€cigarette€smoke.€€However,€the€only€evidence€of€any€ð ðirrationalityðð€on€the€part€of€theÏpetitioner€is€the€petitionerððs€own€testimony.€€According€to€Mr.€Shirley,€who€has€known€theÏpetitioner€since€the€1950s,€there€was€no€indication€that€the€petitioner€did€not€understandÏthe€proceedings.€€Mr.€Shirley€testified€that€the€petitioner€seemed€lucid€and€was€activelyÏinvolved€in€the€plea€negotiations€with€the€State.€€In€light€of€the€foregoing,€the€petitionerÏhas€failed€to€prove€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence€that€Mr.€Shirley€failed€to€recognizeÏany€alleged€ð ðirrationalityðð€on€the€part€of€the€petitioner€or€that€the€evidence€preponderatesÏagainst€the€trial€courtððs€finding€that€he€received€the€effective€assistance€of€counsel.€€ThisÏcontention€is€also€without€merit.ÌÌà œ àà ô àThe€petitioner€further€contends€that€he€did€not€receive€the€effectiveÏassistance€of€counsel€because€Mr.€Shirley€ð ðwas€involved€in€a€guilty€plea€agreement€inÏwhich€[the€petitioner]€agreed€to€plead€to€more€charges€than€the€State€was€demanding.ðð€ÏHowever,€the€evidence€presented€at€the€post„conviction€hearing€indicated€that€theÏpetitioner€was€offered€three€different€plea€bargain€choices€by€the€State.€€The€petitionerÏrejected€two€of€these€offers,€but€worked€with€Mr.€Shirley€in€ð ðtweakingðð€the€third€offer.€€TheÏthird€offer€consisted,€in€part,€of€the€petitioner€pleading€guilty€to€only€one€Class€E€felonyÏof€sexual€exploitation€of€a€minor.€€However,€according€to€Mr.€Shirley,€although€it€wouldÏhave€been€ð ðmore€advantageousðð€to€have€taken€this€offer,€the€petitioner€ð ðkept€playingÏaround€with€[the€offer]€wanting€to€adjust,€wanting€more€of€this€or€change€this€or€changeÏthat.€€At€some€point€in€all€of€that€[the€State]€just€said€no.ðð€€As€a€result,€the€petitioner€pledÏguilty€to€two€Class€E€felonies€as€part€of€his€plea€bargain.€€There€is€no€proof€in€the€recordÏthat€any€subsequent€change€in€the€offered€plea€bargain€was€the€result€of€ineffectiveÏassistance€of€counsel.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÐ ä9„06 Ðà œ àà ô àThe€petitioner€next€contends€that€his€guilty€pleas€were€not€voluntarilyÏentered.€€The€petitioner€argues€that€at€the€time€of€the€guilty€plea€he€was€suffering€fromÏa€leg€injury,€a€broken€nose,€and€an€ear€œinfectionñVñ€and€that€he€pled€guilty€because€heÏbelieved€he€could€receive€the€necessary€medical€treatment€only€in€prison.ñVññVñ.›€›€The›€petitioner›€argues›€that›€he›€believed›Ïð ðthe›€only›€way›€he›€could›€get›€the›€medical›€treatment›€he›€needed›€was›€by›€eñVññWñntering›€the›€guilty›€pleas.ð𛀛€The›€petitioner›€ñWññXñtestified›€›that€›he€›was€›in€›pain€›and€›needed€›immediate€›medical€›treatment€›which€›caused€›him€›to€›plead€›guilty.€›Ï›He€›claimed€›he€›was€›told€›he€›could€›only€›receive€›the€›necessary€›medical€›treatment€›in€›prison.€ñXñ›€œñYñ€ñYñHe›€furtherÏœclaimñZñedñZññ[ñsñ[ñ›€that€Mr.€Shirley€told€him€if€he€did€not€plead€guilty,€he€could€be€in€the€county€jail€forÏseveral€years€while€the€charges€pending€against€him€were€awaiting€trial€and€disposition.€ÏHowever,€the€only€evidence€presented€by€the€petitioner€to€support€these€claims€was€theÏpetitionerððs€own€testimony.€€In€fact,€Mr.€Shirley€specifically€denied€advising€the€petitionerÏhe€would€wait€in€county€jail€for€several€years€awaiting€disposition€of€pending€cases.€€Mr.ÏShirley€also€testified€that€they€infrequently€discussed€the€petitionerððs€medical€œproblemsñ\ñ,ñ\ñ›Ïand€he€did€not€recall€the€petitioner€telling€him€he€needed€medical€treatment.€€He€also€didÏnot€recall€telling€the€petitioner€he€could€receive€medical€treatment€in€prison.ÌÌà œ àà ô à€The€petitioner€also€contends€that€his€guilty€pleas€were€not€knowinglyÏentered.€€He€claims€that€on€the€day€he€pled€guilty,€he€did€not€eat€lunch,€and€as€a€result,Ïhe€was€suffering€from€low€blood€sugar€when€he€pled€guilty.€€According€to€the€petitioner,Ïthis€low€blood€sugar€caused€him€to€be€confused€and€disoriented.€€The€petitioner€alsoÏtestified€that€he€is€allergic€to€cigarette€smoke€and€that€prior€to€entering€his€guilty€plea,€heÏwas€exposed€to€cigarette€smoke€in€the€county€jail€cell€and€in€the€holding€cell.€€TheÏpetitioner€claimed€that€such€exposure€caused€him€to€be€in€a€ð ðdreamlikeðð€or€ð ðdrunkenððÏstate€at€the€time€he€pled€guilty.€€In€contrast,€Mr.€Shirley€testified€that€the€petitioner€wasÏlucid€at€the€time€of€his€guilty€plea€and€that€there€was€no€indication€that€the€petitioner€didÏnot€understand€the€proceedings.€€Mr.€Shirley€also€testified€that€the€petitioner€ð ðneverÏappeared€confusedðð€on€the€day€of€his€guilty€œplea.ñ^ñ€€›ñ]ñÐ  ´2T). Ðñ]ññ^ñ›ÌÌà œ àà ô à€We€note€that€questions€concerning€the€credibility€of€witnesses,€the€weightÏand€value€to€be€given€to€their€testimony,€and€the€factual€issues€raised€by€the€evidenceÏare€to€be€resolved€by€the€trial€court,€not€œñ_ñtñ_ñhis›€Court.€€òòBlackóó,€794€S.W.2d€at€755.€€The€post„Ð ä9„06 Ðconviction€court€found€that€the€petitioner€ð ðdid€not€suffer€from€any€medical€condition€thatÏinterfered€with€his€ability€to€make€a€knowing,€voluntary€plea.ðð€€The€post„conviction€courtÏfurther€found€that€there€was€no€reasonable€basis€for€petitionerððs€assertion€that€he€wasÏcoerced€into€pleading€guilty€with€the€promise€of€medical€treatment.€€As€it€was€within€theÏprovince€of€the€post„conviction€court€to€accredit€the€testimony€of€Mr.€Shirley€over€that€ofÏthe€petitioner€and€the€evidence€does€not€preponderate€against€the€trial€courtððs€judgment,Ïthis€issue€is€without€merit.ÌÌà œ àà ô àAccordingly,€we€affirm€the€post„conviction€courtððs€denial€of€the€petitionerððsÏpost„conviction€petition.ÌÌÓÓà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ à______________________________Ìà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ àJOHN€H.€PEAY,€JudgeÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JudgeÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌJOHN€EVERETT€WILLIAMS,€JudgeÌÌÌÌà œ àà ô àà L àà ¤ àà ü àà T àà ¬ àà  à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€ÌÌÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€