ÿWPCY  …# VUNa %¯ 0Ƶ4{  ž w@¦ Ææ Ƭ Ær Æ8 Æþ D3Ä 0J÷ 0TA 0^• 0hó 0r[ 0|Í 0†I 0Ï 1u_U,Ô 0d BdU,U>­U6ë 0@!B)aDCŠ AOÍU*ÄFv~ vÓˆ D+[ A©† 0K/ AOz 0DÉ D/ B< ˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÀÌÀääÀÀÌ0 (ÖÃ9 Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX(žjÆ$¡¡Ñ` ` ÑÑÜÜÑÒ4°ÒÒX°ÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal[  AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ Legal AØ'ÿ LegalTÑÓÓà~| 3|x\ HIJKDL[MNEOPUQÓ€Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5ƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5%%%%'ÿÿdxd2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)< Œ 9p`(ModernP ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ d< Œ 9p`(Monaco< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Courier New("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò% Line 7 d++++7Border 1dd *9,Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial ºÝ ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÔ€(ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÒ 4 ÒÒ X ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓÓÝ  ÝÔ€.ÔÔ€.ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€.XÔÌÌò òMayÏ3,Ï1996ÌÌCecilÏCrowson,ÏJr.ÌÔ€.ôÔAppellateÏCourtÏClerkó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'@Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑMonacoÑÑ ÑÒ  BA Op Monaco ÒÒ  BA Op Monaco Ò'ÈÈÈÈdxd *92›&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKK( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó *‚ƒCþÿ<< Cÿÿ($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÓ&€''X„d&ÓÑ#€''Xd#ÑÔ€(ÔÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÒ 4 ÒÒ X ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÓÓÝ  ÝÔ€)ÔÑ7€XdìdÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÙ€ ÙßL€-/,;+'h|` ´- `€€Lß›à@ àòòIN€THE€COURT€OFÏCRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEóóÌà@ àòòAT€KNOXVILLEóóÌà@ àNOVEMBER€1995€SESSIONÌÌLARRY€T.€YOUNG,à àà à*à àC.C.A.€#€03C01„9501„CR„00009€Ìà àAppellant,à àà à*à àKNOX€COUNTYÌVS.à àà àà àà àà à*à àHon.€Ray€L.ÏJenkins,€JudgeÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà à*à à(Post„Conviction)Ìà àAppellee.à àà àà à*ÌÌòòFor€Appellantóó:à àà àà àà àòòForÏAppelleeóó:ÌÓÓDouglas€A.€Trantà àà àà àCharles€W.ÏBursonÌAttorneyà àà àà àà àà àAttorneyÏGeneral€and€ReporterÌ900€South€Gay€StreetÌSuite€1502à àà àà àà àChristina€S.ÏShevalierÌKnoxville,€TN€€37902à àà àAssistantÏAttorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àCriminalÏJustice€DivisionÌà àà àà àà àà àà à450€JamesÏRobertson€ParkwayÌà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,ÍTN€€37243„0493ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àRandall€E.€NicholsÌà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àFred€BrightÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAsst.€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àCity„County€BuildingÌà àà àà àà àà àà àKnoxville,€TN€€37902ÌÌà àà àÌÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àÌÌÌOPINION€FILED€òò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óóÌÌÌÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌÌÌÌGARY€R.€WADE,€JUDGEÇÓÓà@ àòòOPINIONóóÌà àà àThe€petitioner,€Larry€T.€Young,€appeals€the€trialÏcourtððs€denial€of€post„conviction€relief.€€The€issues€presentedÏfor€review€are€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à(1)€€whether€petitionerððs€four€priorÏconvictions€used€in€finding€the€petitionerÏto€be€a€habitual€criminal€violated€doubleÏjeopardy€principles,€thus€requiring€hisÏhabitual€criminal€conviction€to€be€setÏaside;ÌÌà8 àà8 à(2)€€whether€the€Knox€County€Juvenile€CourtÏwas€required€to€conduct€a€hearing€underÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„234(a)(4)€(Supp.€1973)Ïto€determine€the€mental€status€of€theÏpetitioner€prior€to€transferring€theÏcharges€to€Knox€County€Criminal€Court;ÌÌà8 àà8 à(3)€€whether€the€petitioner€was€denied€theÏeffective€assistance€of€counsel€at€theÏguilty€plea€hearing€and€at€the€habitualÏcriminal€trial;€andÌÌà8 àà8 à(4)€€whether€the€petitionerððs€mentalÏretardation€and€low€level€of€educationÏbarred€application€of€the€waiver€defense.€ÓÓÌÌà àà àWe€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌà àà àThe€petitioner€was€convicted€of€second€degreeÏburglary.€€Because€he€had€been€convicted€previously€of€otherÏcrimes,€he€was€adjudged€to€be€a€habitual€criminal€and€theÍsentence€was€enhanced€to€a€term€of€life.€€This€court€affirmed€onÏdirect€appeal.€€òòState€v.€Larry€Thomas€Youngóó,€No.€757€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.,€at€Knoxville,€July€31,€1981),€òòpermóó.€òòtoóó€òòappóó.€œòòdeniedóó,Ï(Tenn.›€1981).€ÌÌà àà àOn€June€26,€1989,€the€petitioner€filed€a€òòproóó€òòseóóÏpetition€challenging€convictions€in€two€separate€counties.€ÏCounsel€was€appointed€and€amendments€to€the€petition€were€made.€ÏThe€petitioner€then€retained€Douglas€Trant,€who€was€substitutedÏas€counsel€and€who€filed€additional€amendments.€€At€theÏevidentiary€hearing,€the€petitioner€did€not€address€any€of€theÏclaims€set€forth€in€the€initial,€amended€petition€but€reliedÏsolely€on€the€final€amendments€filed€by€his€current€counsel.€€ÌÌà àà àThe€trial€court€found€that€the€petitioner€had€waivedÏany€issues€concerning€the€underlying€convictions€because€theyÏwere€procedural€in€nature.€€As€to€the€double€jeopardy€claim€theÏtrial€court€ruled€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àThe€language€of€the€transfer€was€ambiguousÏbut€indicated€an€intent€to€remove€the€casesÏto€Criminal€Court.€€This€was€the€only€powerÏof€the€Court€on€such€a€removal€petition.€€ÌÌÓÓThe€trial€court€also€held€that€the€evidence€was€insufficient€toÍestablish€that€trial€counsel€had€been€ineffective€by€failing€toÏinvestigate€the€mental€condition€of€the€petitioner:€ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àNeither€the€circumstances,€the€actions€ofÏpetitioner€or€the€statements€of€his€familyÏwould€have€alerted€petitionerððs€trialÏcounsel€to€examine€petitionerððs€mentalÏhistory€and€abilities.€ÌÌÌÌÓÓà àà àIn€this€appeal,€the€petitioner€claims€that€he€had€beenÏplaced€in€jeopardy€when€the€juvenile€court€initially€adjudgedÏhim€to€be€a€delinquent€and€that€his€subsequent€guilty€pleas€inÏthe€trial€court€should€be€set€aside.€€He€also€asserts€that€theÏjuvenile€court€should€have€first€conducted€a€hearing€toÏdetermine€whether€the€petitioner€was€committable€due€to€mentalÏretardation€or€mental€illness.€€The€petitioner€argues€that€hisÏtrial€counselððs€failure€to€present€these€issues€deprived€him€ofÏthe€effective€assistance€of€counsel.€€Finally,€the€petitionerÏcontends€that€he€could€not€have€knowingly€and€voluntarily€waivedÏthe€issues€because€of€his€mental€condition.€€€€€€€€€€€€€€à@ àIÌà àà àThe€petitioner€challenges€four€of€the€five€convictionsÏused€to€prove€he€was€a€habitual€criminal.€€He€was€a€juvenile€atÏthe€time€of€each€of€the€four€offenses€and€appeared€first€in€theÏjuvenile€court.€€Former€Knox€County€Juvenile€Judge€Richard€F.ÏDouglass€signed€an€order€on€a€printed€form€used€for€issuingÍcitations€in€juvenile€court.€€The€printed€material€includedÏthese€words,€"It€is,€therefore,€CONSIDERED,€ORDERED,€ADJUDGEDÏAND€DECREED€as€follows...."€€Three€of€the€four€citation€formsÏwere€followed€by€handwritten€notations:€"Found€guilty€ofÏprobable€guilt.€€See€Order€œÌ#C„2300›€of€even€date."€€The€handwriting€on€the€form€for€theÏfourth€offense€stated,€"[f]ound€guilty€of€probable€guilt€andÏturned€over€to€the€Knox€County€Sheriff€to€be€tried€as€an€adult."€ÏPrinted€material€appeared€after€each€of€the€handwrittenÏnotations:€ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àIt€is€further€ORDERED€that€this€Court€shallÏretain€jurisdiction€of€this€cause€for€theÏpurpose€of€making€such€further€or€otherÏorders€herein€for€the€welfare€of€any€childÏnamed€herein€as€may€be€from€time€to€timeÏfound€necessary.€œÌÌÓÓ›The€spaces€œcontained€in€the€provisions€for€holding›€a€juvenile€toÏbe€a€"dependent,€delinquent,€or€unruly€child"€were€left€blank€onÏthe€forms€for€each€offense.€€An€order,€also€signed€by€JudgeÏDouglass,€provided,€"[i]t€is€therefore€ordered,€adjudged€andÏdecreed€that€said€child€is€found€guilty€of€probable€guilt€andÏt[ur]ned€over€[to]€the€Knox€County€Sheriff€to€be€tried€as€anÏadult"€on€each€of€the€charges.€€Judge€Douglass€issued€separateÏtransfer€orders€for€trial€as€an€adult.ÌÌà àà àThe€petitioner€did€not€testify€at€the€post„convictionÏhearing.€€Jackie€Tipton€Kitts,€Knox€County€Juvenile€Court€clerkÏat€the€time€of€the€transfers,€testified€that€she€had€no€personalÏrecollection€of€the€events€that€took€place€in€the€cases€butÏconfirmed€that€her€handwriting€appeared€on€each€of€the€printedÏcitation€forms€and€the€order.€€United€States€Congressman€John€J.ÏDuncan,€who,€as€an€attorney,€represented€the€petitioner€at€theÏjuvenile€hearing€and€at€the€guilty€plea€hearing€in€theÏunderlying€convictions,€was€not€called€as€a€witness€by€eitherÏthe€petitioner€or€the€state.€€The€record€on€appeal€does€notÏinclude€a€transcript€of€the€testimony€presented€at€the€juvenileÏhearing.ÌÌà àà àThe€petitioner€entered€pleas€of€guilt€in€the€KnoxÏCounty€Criminal€Court€"as€a€juvenile,€being€certified€as€suchÏfrom€juvenile€court."€€His€four€felony€convictions€includedÏgrand€larceny,€burglary€of€an€automobile,€receiving€stolenÏproperty€exceeding€$100€in€value,€and€taking€an€automobile€ofÏanother€for€temporary€use€without€consent€of€the€owner.€€HeÏclaims€that€each€of€the€underlying€convictions€relied€upon€forÏthe€finding€of€habitual€criminality€should€be€set€aside€onÍdouble€jeopardy€grounds€because€the€juvenile€court€had,€perhapsÏinadvertently,€previously€found€him€to€be€a€delinquent.€€HeÏargues€that€such€a€finding€by€the€juvenile€court€was€anÏadjudication€on€the€merits€and€any€subsequent€convictions€on€theÏsame€charges€should€be€ruled€void.€€In€response,€the€stateÏasserts€a€procedural€defense.€€It€contends€that€the€petitionerÏcannot€collaterally€attack€habitual€criminal€status€withoutÏfirst€challenging,€in€a€separate€proceeding,€the€underlyingÏconvictions.ÌÌà àà à€The€ruling€of€our€supreme€court€in€òòState€v.ÏMcClintockóó,€732€S.W.2d€268,€272€(Tenn.€1987),€requires€Ïpetitioners€to€attack€a€facially€valid,€final€judgment€of€aÏprior€conviction€through€post„conviction€procedures.€€òòSeeóó€òòStateÏv.€Cottrellóó,€868€S.W.2d€673,€678€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€œ1992);€òòseeóóÏòòalsoóó€òòState›€v.€John€W.€Buchananóó,€No.€01C01„9411„CC„00388,€slipÏop.€at€11€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€at€Nashville,€November€16,€1995).€ÏThe€proper€procedure€is€for€the€petitioner€to€first€attack€theÏprior€conviction€and,€if€successful,€then€challenge€the€enhancedÏsentence.€€òòState€v€McClintockóó,€732€S.W.2d€at€274.€€There€is€aÏ"presumption€of€regularity€that€attaches€to€facially€sufficient,Ïfinal€judgments."€€òòId.óó€at€270.€€ÌÌà àà àIn€òòState€v.€Princeóó,€781€S.W.2d€œ846,€851›€(Tenn.€1989),Ïour€supreme€court€held€that€a€"defendant€cannot€maintain€aÏcollateral€attack€by€post„conviction€on€his€status€of€habitualÏcriminality€by€attacking€the€validity€of€his€predicateÏconvictions."€€œThe›€court€ruled€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àà àWith€certain€exceptions€...,€it€isÏincumbent€upon€a€defendant€to€establish€theÏinvalidity€of€prior€guilty€pleas€before€heÏcan€procedurally€launch€a€collateral€attackÏon€a€subsequent€habitual€criminal€sentenceÏon€that€basis....€€The€petition€must€beÏfiled€in€the€court€where€the€earlierÏconviction€took€place€to€attack€theÏconstitutional€validity€of€the€priorÏconviction.€€A€defendant€successful€in€suchÏa€proceeding€may€then€expose€the€enhancedÏsentence€on€the€subsequent€conviction€to€aÏcollateral€attack€as€well.€€ÌÓÓòòId.óó€at€852.€€"[W]here€the€guilty€plea€convictions€and€theÏ[finding€of]€habitual€criminal€...€took€place€in€the€same€forum,Ïjudicial€economy€is€best€served€by€requiring€petitions€to€beÏfiled,€consolidated€and€heard€in€the€same€court,€at€the€sameÏœtime."€€òòId.óó;€òòsee›óó€òòalsoóó€òòState€v.€McClintockóó,€732€S.W.2d€at€274.€€ÌÌà àà àIn€our€view,€all€of€the€prior€judgments€entered€by€theÏtrial€court€were€facially€valid.€€The€criminal€court€hadÏjurisdiction€over€the€petitioner€"as€a€juvenile€being€certifiedÍas€such€from€juvenile€court."€€òòSeeóó€òòSawyers€v.€Stateóó,€814€S.W.2dÏ725,€729€(Tenn.€1991)€(failure€to€follow€proper€transferÏprocedure€by€the€absence€of€a€transfer€order€does€not€affectÏsubject€matter€jurisdiction).€€Thus€the€convictions€would€beÏvoidable€in€the€light€most€favorable€to€the€petitioner,€notÏvoid.€€The€four€convictions€at€issue€here€and€the€eventualÏfinding€of€habitual€criminality,€however,€occurred€in€KnoxÏCounty.€€As€suggested€in€òòPrinceóó,€judicial€economy€may€be€bestÏserved€by€allowing€the€petitioner€to€address€his€underlyingÏconvictions€and€his€status€as€a€habitual€criminal€in€the€sameÏproceeding.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€McClintockóó,€732€S.W.2d€at€274;€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€40„30„101,€òòetóó€òòseq.óó€€€€€€œÌ›€€€Ìà àà àThe€petitioner€relies€on€the€ruling€in€òòState€v.€Davisóó,Ï637€S.W.2d€471€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1982),€as€the€basis€for€hisÏclaim€of€double€jeopardy.€€In€òòDavisóó,€this€court€held€that€theÏconstitutional€safeguard€against€double€jeopardy€was€violatedÏwhen€the€juvenile€court€"blended€a€transfer€hearing€with€aÏhearing€on€the€merits€of€the€petition...."€€òòId.óó€at€474€(citingÏòòBreed€v.€Jonesóó,€421€U.S.€519€(1975)).€€In€òòDavisóó,€the€juvenileÏcourt€held€that€"the€child€[was]€a€delinquent€child€...€[becauseÏthe]€child€admitted€[his€guilt]€to€the€charge€in€the€petitionÍduring€the€prehearing€conference."€€òòId.óó€at€473€(emphasis€inÏoriginal).€€The€order€in€òòDavisóó€was€contradictory€in€that€it€alsoÏprovided€that€the€juvenile€be€transferred€to€the€circuit€courtÏ"to€be€dealt€with€as€an€adult."€€òòId.óó€at€473.€€Ìà àà àIn€òòState€v.€Jacksonóó,€503€S.W.2d€185,€188€(Tenn.€1973),Ïour€supreme€court€ruled€that€a€juvenile€court€trial€forÏdelinquency€places€the€defendant€in€jeopardy;€therefore,€aÏsubsequent€trial€as€an€adult€would€violate€double€jeopardyÏprinciples.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Const.€art.€1,€ðð€10.€€œInitially,€weÏbelieve›€that€the€trial€court€correctly€ruled€that€the€claim€hadÏbeen€œwaived.€€In€òòState›€v.€Haleóó,€833€S.W.2d€65,€67„68€(Tenn.Ïœ1992),€our€supreme€court€ruled€that€"defenses€and€objectionsÏbased€on€defects€in€the€institution€of€prosecution€or€in€theÏindictment"€are€waived€if€they€are€not€raised€prior€to€trial.€ÏFurther,€a€"knowledgeable€and€voluntary€guilty€plea€constitutesÏa€waiver€of€the€right€to€claim€double€jeopardy."€€òòState€v.€SteveÏD.€Andersonóó,€No.€79,€slip€op.€at€4€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€atÏKnoxville,€July€13,€1989)€(quoting€òòDonaldson€v.€Roseóó,€525€S.W.2dÏ853,€856€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1975)€(Oliver€J.,€concurring)).€ÏDespite€the€waiver,€we€will€address€the€merits€of€theÏpetitionerððs€claim.ÌÌà àà àIn€short,€the€evidence€in€this€regard€supports€theÏnotion€that€the€original€proceeding€was€nothing€more€than€aÏtransfer€hearing.€€While€conceding€that€a€more€precise€choice€ofÏlanguage€could€have€been€utilized€by€the€juvenile€court€to€orderÏthe€transfer,€each€order€expressly€provides€that€the€petitionerÏbe€"turned€over€to€the€Knox€County€Sheriff€to€be€tried€as€anÏadult."€€As€in€òòDavisóó,€the€juvenile€court€issued€an€order€toÏtransfer€the€petitioner€to€be€tried€as€an€adult.€€The€primaryÏconfusion€here€resulted€when€the€trial€court€added€to€theÏcitation€form€the€words€"found€guilty€of€probable€guilt."€€It€isÏour€view,€however,€that€this€language€establishes€probable€causeÏdetermination€rather€than€an€adjudication€of€guilt.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€37„234€(Supp.€1973);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€€òòMcGaha€v.€Stateóó,€461ÏF.€Supp.€360,€361€(E.D.€Tenn.€1978)€(stating€that€a€judge€hasÏlimited€statutory€authority€in€a€juvenile€transfer€hearing).€ÏUnlike€òòDavisóó,€the€evidence€here€does€not€support€a€finding€thatÏthe€juvenile€court€ruled€the€petitioner€to€be€a€delinquentÏchild.€ÌÌà àà àThe€fact€that€the€citation€form€retains€jurisdictionÏdoes€imply€some€duality.€€Written€words,€however,€prevail€on€aÏprinted€form€when€the€written€and€printed€parts€appearÍinconsistent.€€òòSeeóó€òòWest€v.€Laminite€Plastics€Mfg.€Co.óó,€674ÏS.W.2d€310,€313€(Tenn.€App.€1984).€€Because€there€is€someÏincongruity€in€this€instance,€the€written€language€transferringÏthe€petitioner€to€be€tried€as€an€adult€controls.€€Thus,€theÏeventual€convictions€to€the€criminal€charges€did€not€violateÏdouble€jeopardy€principles.ÌÌà@ àIIÌà àà àThe€petitioner€next€claims€that€he€should€have€beenÏgranted€relief€because€the€procedure€used€to€transfer€hisÏjuvenile€charges€violated€his€right€to€the€due€process€of€law.€ÏHe€specifically€argues€that€his€underlying€convictions€are€voidÏbecause€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„234(a)(4)(Supp.€1973)€required€theÏjuvenile€court€to€first€conduct€a€hearing€to€determine€whetherÏthe€petitioner€was€committable€due€to€mental€retardation€orÏillness.€€The€petitioner€alleges€that€if€the€hearing€had€takenÏplace,€the€evidence€would€have€established€that€he€was€committedÏdue€to€his€mental€retardation.€€The€state€asserts€that€(1)€theÏstatute€does€not€mandate€a€hearing;€(2)€the€evidence€failed€toÏestablish€the€petitionerððs€mental€retardation;€and€(3)€theÏpetitioner€has€waived€the€issue€by€pleading€guilty€in€criminalÏcourt.ÌÌà àà àDr.€William€J.€Kenney,€a€licensed€psychologist,Ïtestified€at€the€post„conviction€hearing€as€an€expert€in€theÏareas€of€school€and€clinical€psychology.€€While€he€had€neverÏspoken€to€the€petitioner,€he€had€reviewed€the€petitionerððsÏelementary€school€records€and€the€transcript€of€the€guilty€pleaÏhearing.€€Dr.€Kenney€testified€that€the€petitionerððs€elementaryÏschool€records€indicated€a€fifth„grade€education€and€an€I.Q.€ofÏ66€on€the€Wechsler€Intelligence€Scale€in€1965;€that€placed€theÏpetitioner€in€the€lower€one€(1)€percentile€of€intellectualÏfunctioning.€€The€petitioner€also€scored€a€74€on€the€Otis€QuickÏScore€in€1965.€€Dr.€Kenney€stated€that€I.Q.€scores€of€66€and€74Ïwould€place€the€petitioner€in€the€category€of€mentally€retarded.€ÏHe€believed€that€the€I.Q.€scores€alone€"would€...€call€intoÏquestion"€his€competency€to€stand€trial€and€that€a€mentalÏevaluation€should€have€been€conducted.€€He€testified€that€theÏissue€of€whether€the€petitioner€was€committable€to€anÏinstitution€for€the€mentally€retarded€was€"something€that€wouldÏhave€to€be€considered€and€looked€at€very€closely"€and€questionedÏthe€petitionerððs€ability€to€understand€a€waiver€of€hisÏconstitutional€rights€at€the€time€of€the€guilty€pleas.€€Dr.ÏKenney€testified€that€it€would€be€very€difficult€for€a€personÍwithin€the€mentally€retarded€range€to€understand€the€complexityÏof€the€issues€and€that€more€procedures€would€be€required€inÏorder€to€determine€whether€the€petitioner€had€effectively€waivedÏhis€various€constitutional€rights.€€€€€€€€€€ÌÌà àà àThe€record€of€the€guilty€plea€proceeding€doesÏestablish€that€the€petitioner€could€not€read€or€write€at€theÏtime€of€the€transfer€hearing.€€The€trial€court,€however,€tookÏseveral€precautions€to€insure€that€the€petitioner€understood€hisÏconstitutional€rights.€€It€permitted€the€petitionerððs€mother€toÏsit€with€him€throughout€the€hearing€because€it€"want[ed]€to€beÏsure€that€[the€petitioner]€understood"€the€effects€of€his€guiltyÏplea.€€The€trial€court€asked€the€petitioner€several€timesÏwhether€he€understood€the€nature€of€the€proceeding€to€which€heÏresponded,€"I€understand."€€The€petitioner€was€asked€severalÏtimes€whether€he€had€any€questions€and€was€given€time€with€hisÏcounsel€to€review€the€documents€necessary€for€the€acceptance€ofÏthe€pleas.€€€ÌÌà àà àUnder€the€law€in€effect€at€the€time€of€this€case,€aÏjuvenile€could€be€transferred€to€be€tried€as€an€adult€uponÏpetition,€notice,€and€hearing.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„234€(Supp.Í1973).€€The€statute€provided,€in€part,€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à[T]he€court€before€hearing€the€petition€onÏits€merits€may€transfer€the€child€...€to€beÏdealt€with€as€an€adult€...€if:ÌÌà@ à*€*€*Ìà àà àÌà8 àà8 à(4)€€the€court€finds€that€there€areÏreasonable€ground€to€believe€that€ÌÌà@ à*€*€*ÌÌà8 àà8 à(ii)€€the€child€is€not€amenable€toÏtreatment€or€rehabilitation€as€a€juvenileÏthrough€available€facilities;ÌÌà8 àà8 à(iii)€€the€child€is€not€committable€to€anÏinstitution€for€the€mentally€retarded€orÏmentally€ill....ÌÌÓÓTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„234(a)(4)(ii)€&€(iii)(Supp.€1973).€€€ÌÌà àà àThe€state€relies€on€òòState€v.€Haleóó,€833€S.W.2d€65Ï(Tenn.€1992),€for€its€position€that€the€petitioner€has€waivedÏany€claim€for€relief.€€In€òòHaleóó,€our€supreme€court€held€thatÏprocedural€defects€in€a€transfer€hearing€are€waived€by€aÏjuvenile€if€not€raised€prior€to€trial.€€òòId.óó;€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.Ï12(b)(1)€&€(2).€€We€agree,€therefore,€that€the€issue€was€waivedÏupon€the€entry€of€the€guilty€pleas€in€the€trial€court.€€€€ÌÌà àà àNotwithstanding€the€waiver€issue,€we€find€no€merit€toÍpetitionerððs€argument.€€The€petitioner€cites€no€authority€whichÏwould€require€the€trial€court€to€conduct€a€hearing€to€determineÏthe€petitionerððs€mental€status€prior€to€his€transfer€to€trialÏcourt.€€Our€own€search€failed€to€find€any€such€authority.€€TheÏstatute€merely€provided€that€the€trial€court,€among€otherÏthings,€find€that€the€child€was€not€amenable€to€treatment€orÏrehabilitation€as€a€juvenile€and€that€the€child€was€notÏcommittable€to€an€institution€for€the€mentally€retarded€orÏmentally€ill.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„234(a)(4).€€Because€theÏtranscript€from€the€juvenile€hearing€was€not€provided,€we€areÏunable€to€determine€whether€the€trial€court€made€such€a€finding.€ÏThe€petitioner€has€the€burden€to€establish€a€record€adequate€toÏsupport€his€claims.€€òòSeeóó€òòClenny€v.€Stateóó,€576€S.W.2d€at€14.€ÏMoreover,€the€petitioner€did€not€prove€that€he€was€committableÏto€an€institution€for€the€mentally€retarded€at€the€time€of€theÏtransfer;€Dr.€Kenney€merely€testified€that€due€to€theÏpetitionerððs€low€I.Q.€scores€the€issue€needed€to€be€"consideredÏand€looked€at€very€closely."€€The€burden€is€always€on€theÏpetitioner€to€show€that€the€evidence€preponderates€against€theÏfindings€of€the€trial€judge.€€òòBlack€v.€Stateóó,€794€S.W.2d€752,Ï755€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990);€òòClenny€v.€Stateóó,€576€S.W.2d€12,€14Ï(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1978).€€Here,€he€simply€failed€to€prove€hisÍassertions.€€ÌÌà@ àIIIÌà àà àThe€petitioner€next€argues€that€he€receivedÏineffective€assistance€of€counsel€at€both€the€guilty€pleaÏhearing€and€the€habitual€criminal€trial€because€his€trialÏcounsel€failed€to€raise€the€double€jeopardy€issue€and€theÏprocedural€defect€in€transferring€the€petitioner€to€be€tried€asÏan€adult.€€We€disagree.€ÌÌà àà àWhen€a€petitioner€seeks€post„conviction€relief€on€theÏbasis€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel,€he€must€firstÏestablish€that€the€services€rendered€or€the€advice€given€wasÏbelow€"the€range€of€competence€demanded€of€attorneys€in€criminalÏcases."€€òòBaxter€v.€Roseóó,€523€S.W.2d€930,€936€(Tenn.€1975).€ÏSecond,€he€must€show€that€the€deficiencies€"actually€had€anÏadverse€effect€on€the€defense."€€òòStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466ÏU.S.€668,€693€(1984).€€Should€the€petitioner€fail€to€establishÏeither€factor,€he€is€not€entitled€to€relief.ÌÌà àà àMoreover,€on€appeal,€the€findings€of€fact€made€by€theÏtrial€court€are€conclusive€and€will€not€be€disturbed€unless€theÍevidence€contained€in€the€record€preponderates€against€them.€ÏòòRhoden€v.€Stateóó,€816€S.W.2d€56,€60€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991);ÏòòBrooks€v.€Stateóó,€756€S.W.2d€288,€289€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988).€ÏThe€burden€is€on€the€petitioner€to€show€that€the€evidenceÏpreponderated€against€those€findings.€€òòClenny€v.€Stateóó,€576ÏS.W.2d€at€14.ÌÌà àà àAt€the€evidentiary€hearing,€George€Penn,€counsel€forÏthe€petitioner€at€the€habitual€criminal€trial,€testified€that€heÏrecalled€nothing€from€his€interviews€with€the€petitioner€or€hisÏfamily€that€would€have€indicated€that€the€petitioner€wasÏmentally€retarded€or€incompetent.€€He€did€not€remember€reviewingÏpetitionerððs€school€or€juvenile€records€but€stated€thatÏpetitionerððs€I.Q.€scores€would€have€been€only€one€factor€toÏconsider.€€He€also€did€not€believe€that€any€double€jeopardyÏviolation€had€occurred€in€the€underlying€convictions.€ÌÌà àà àFirst,€no€double€jeopardy€violation€occurred.€€Thus,Ïthe€petitioner€suffered€no€prejudice€by€his€counselððs€failure€toÏraise€the€meritless€issue€at€the€submission€hearing€or€at€theÏtrial€on€habitual€criminality.€€Secondly,€the€evidence€does€notÏpreponderate€against€the€trial€courtððs€conclusion€that€theÍcircumstances€would€not€have€warranted€an€examination€of€theÏpetitionerððs€mental€state.€€The€scope€of€review€is€limited€onÏappeal.€€When€there€is€evidence€to€support€a€factualÏdetermination,€this€court€is€bound€to€the€conclusions€of€theÏtrial€court.€€Because€neither€ground€served€as€a€basis€forÏrelief,€no€prejudice€resulted€from€any€claimed€deficiency€on€theÏpart€of€counsel.€€€€€ÌÌà@ àIVÌà àà àAs€his€final€claim,€the€petitioner€argues€that€hisÏmental€retardation€at€the€time€of€the€transfer€hearings€and€theÏguilty€pleas€precluded€any€application€of€the€waiver€defense.€ÏBecause,€however,€we€have€determined€that€there€was€no€doubleÏjeopardy€violation,€waiver€is€irrelevant.€€Further,€we€need€notÏaddress€waiver€since€a€juvenile€court€is€not€required€to€conductÏa€separate€hearing€to€determine€whether€there€are€reasonableÏgrounds€to€believe€that€the€juvenile€is€committable.ÌÌà àà àAccordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€isÏaffirmed.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà à________________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àGary€R.€Wade,€Judge€ÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ_____________________________ÌJoseph€M.€Tipton,€JudgeÌÌÌÌòò(NOT€PARTICIPATING)óóÌJoe€D.€Duncan,€Special€Judge€