WPC$ jw+FJQDas-0ˋc M _eq>M 8@W`σzK&r[nK&{o܄0ܦ&L5N2N5l!WL$z3'HW,'{R ^4sv cEF*q]+{aiIx=cY<aOcE W:V8~"ca4}M%_L{jTMogZIq.n첂©.}S݉:?i U-Ax@Z~ohT!dGOyA )"leX׼ZJ֜eU8+;c 2S!5`b7S"pK_ Xqhq1;aO.u hj:j5Kqa~x$hcVu%ךp) SX[%gpg!#~$ Ex5)akybHiE# F UNQ % 0( L ' 0 l@ w@ 4  U: 0DI U: % U:L&U:r%U:L U:WU:AM{U:U: U: &!U:" BH"H"H"e"Lm"m"m"m"m"m"m" D3""" 0D"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" AO0### 0DE$ D/$ B$HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLl(hH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($C:\OFFICE\WPWIN\TEMPLATE\STANDARD.WPT  X"UXXX  `   2     Thepetitionerhasattachednumerousletters,certificatesandother  documentstosupporthiscontentionthathisconducthasbeenexemplary.((3$ !      0   {|D}~UEUZeӀuM%3|x,  AZ"Arial Regular(#$  0  ,  AZ"Arial Regular X"UXXX  `   3     Thelastsentenceofsection3911112reads: Exceptasprovided  undertheprovisionsof4035117,intheeventthesubsequentactprovidesfor  alesserpenalty,anypunishmentimposedshallbeinaccordancewiththesubsequentact. X"UXXX"UTenn.CodeAnn.#X"UXX X"U#Ԁ3911112(1997)(emphasisadded).,  AZ"Arial Regular B X"UXXX  `   4     InCrum,thepetitionerreceivedalifesentenceforaggravated  kidnappinginJanuary,1982.Stateexrel.BobbyL.Crum,slipop.at2.He  arguedthatunderthe1989act,hewouldbetreatedasaRangeII,ClassAoffendersubjecttoarangeofpunishmentoftwentyfivetofortyyears.Slipop.at4.AswepointoutinCrum,determinationofwhichclassificationappliedand p developmentoftheevidencerelevanttosentencingunderthe1989Actwouldrequirethatnewsentencinghearingsbeheldineachcase.Weconcludedthatsocietyshouldnotbeforcedtoundergosuchadisruptionofitsjusticesystem.Id.,  AZ"Arial Regular X"UXXX  `   3     Thelastsentenceofsection3911112reads: Exceptasprovided  undertheprovisionsof4035117,intheeventthesubsequentactprovidesfor  alesserpenalty,anypunishmentimposedshallbeinaccordancewiththesubsequentact.  X"UXXX"UTenn.CodeAnn.#X"UXX X"U#Ԁ3911112(1997)(emphasisadded).,  AZ"Arial Regular BX"UXXX  `   4     InCrum,thepetitionerreceivedalifesentenceforaggravated  kidnappinginJanuary,1982.Stateexrel.BobbyL.Crum,slipop.at2.He  arguedthatunderthe1989act,hewouldbetreatedasaRangeII,ClassAoffendersubjecttoarangeofpunishmentoftwentyfivetofortyyears.Slipop.at4.AswepointoutinCrum,determinationofwhichclassificationappliedand p developmentoftheevidencerelevanttosentencingunderthe1989Actwouldrequirethatnewsentencinghearingsbeheldineachcase.Weconcludedthatsocietyshouldnotbeforcedtoundergosuchadisruptionofitsjusticesystem.Id.,  AZ"Arial Regular X"UXXX  `   1     The1982Actchangedneitherthepenaltyforseconddegree  murdernoritsclassificationasaClassXfelony.See X"UXXX"UTenn.CodeAnn.#X"UXX X"U #391  701and392212(1982)(repealed1989).,  AZ"Arial Regular CX"UXXX  `   4     InCrum,thepetitionerreceivedalifesentenceforaggravated  kidnappinginJanuary,1982.Stateexrel.BobbyL.Crum,slipop.at2.He  arguedthatunderthe1989act,hewouldbetreatedasaRangeII,ClassAoffendersubjecttoarangeofpunishmentoftwentyfivetofortyyears.Slipop.at4.AswepointoutinCrum,determinationofwhichclassificationappliedand p developmentoftheevidencerelevanttosentencingunderthe1989Actwouldrequirethatnewsentencinghearingsbeheldineachcase.Weconcludedthatsocietyshouldnotbeforcedtoundergosuchadisruptionofitsjusticesystem.Id.,  AZ"Arial Regular X"UXXX  `   1     The1982Actchangedneitherthepenaltyforseconddegree  murdernoritsclassificationasaClassXfelony.SeeX"UXXX"UTenn.CodeAnn.#X"UXX X"U #391  701and392212(1982)(repealed1989).,  AZ"Arial Regular,  AZ"Arial Regular X 6XXXoXX 6   Ad FILEDX 6Xo  October29,1998CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerkdAM ,cAZ"Arial Regular dC:\OFFICE\WPWIN\TEMPLATE\STANDARD.WPT'dxd(3$ !  -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd !   TR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T XXXX7LXdXXd7      r*<,(j 8` `@E` 8ttxP  rߛ@ INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  ̀@@@'ATNASHVILLE   @"SEPTEMBER1998SESSION  p  MICHAELE.BASS , h   )  No.01C019802CC00066 0   `     h   )    p   ` Appellant   h   )   `   `     h   )  HickmanCounty P  vs. `     h   )   p  @   `     h   )  HonorableDonaldP.Harris,Judge 0   STATEOFTENNESSEE, h   )    `     h   )  (HabeasCorpus)   ` Appellee.   h   )     `     h  `     h     FORTHEAPPELLANT: h     FORTHEAPPELLEE: p MICHAELE.BASS   h     JOHNKNOXWALKUP P (ProSe)    h     AttorneyGeneral&Reporter @ TurneyCenterIndustrialPrison     0 Route1    h     TIMOTHYF.BEHAN  p Only,TN371409709 h     AssistantAttorneyGeneral `  `     h     CriminalJusticeDivision x   P  `     h     425FifthAve.North `     h     2dFloor,CordellHullBldg. `     h     Nashville,TN372430493 x     `     h     JOSEPHD.BAUGH,JR. `     h     DistrictAttorneyGeneral `     h     P.O.Box937 `     h     Franklin,TN370651469OPINIONFILED:____________________ AFFIRMED  / +. CURWOODWITTJUDGE  `615 @qq* OPINIONlXX` hp x (#%'0*,.8135@8:<H?AXl    Thepetitioner,MichaelE.Bass,appealsthetrialcourtsdenialofhispetitionforawritofhabeascorpus.Thetrialcourtdidnotappointcounselanddismissedthepetitionwithoutanevidentiaryhearing.Inthisappeal,thepetitionercontendsthatalthoughhewasconvictedandsentencedin1981,theprovisionsofthe1989SentencingReformActapplyandhissentencehasexpired.Weaffirmthejudgmentofthetrialcourt. Therecorddoesnotincludetheoriginaljudgment.Thepleadingsindicatethatthepetitionerwasconvictedofseconddegreemurder,aClassXfelony,onJanuary8,1981.Thepetitionerreceivedalifesentence.ThiscourtaffirmedhisconvictionandsentenceinStatev.MichaelE.Bass,No.82198III P (Tenn.Crim.App.,Nashville,July8,1983).In1982andagainin1989,thestatelegislaturemadewiderangingchangestothesentencinglaws.InNovember,1997,thepetitionerfiledthispetitionforwritofhabeascorpusassertingthat (1)8  thelegislaturehasmandatedtheapplicationofthe   1982and1989sentencingreformactstohissentences,     (2)8  hisconstitutionalrightstoequalprotectionanddue $" processrequiretheapplicationofthe1989CriminalSentencingReformActtohissentence,and     (3)8  thepassageofamorelenientsentencingstructure P(#& withoutextendingitsprovisionstothosewhoweresentencedunderharsherstandardsresultsincruelandunusualpunishmentinviolationoftheEighthAmendmenttotheUnitedStatesConstitution.    ThetrialcourtdismissedhispetitionwithoutahearingonDecember12,1997.Inathoughtfulandthoroughmemorandumoflaw,thetrialjudgefoundthatthe1989ActdidnotaffectpenaltiesimposedbeforetheActseffectivedate,thatsection3911112hasnobearingonthepetitionerssentence,thatthestatehasalegitimateinterestinthefinalityofcriminalconvictions,andthattheexclusionofthosesentencedpriorto1982fromtheActsprovisionshasareasonablerelationshiptoalegitimatestateinterest.Weagree. 0948 Ї Thepetitionerspositionstemsfromthefactthatpursuanttothe1989Act,thesentencingrangeforaRangeIoffenderconvictedofseconddegreemurderisnotlessthanfifteen(15)normorethantwentyfive(25)years.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035112(a)(1)(1997).  #  1      In1981,thepetitioner,afirsttimeoffender, P  wassentencedtolifeimprisonmentandbecauseseconddegreemurderwasdefinedasaClassXfelony,hissentenceisnotsubjecttoreduction forgood,honororincentiveorothersentencecreditsofanysort.Tenn.CodeAnn.395403(Supp.1979)(repealed1982).Thepetitionercontendsthathehasservedinexcessofeighteenyearsasamodelprisoner,and,therefore,undercurrentsentencinglaw,heisentitledtoimmediaterelease.`  #  2         First,wemustpointoutthatinthisstatetheremedyofhabeascorpusisverylimitedinscope.Thewrit,ascodifiedatTennesseeCodeAnnotatedsections2921101to130,willissueonlyinthecaseofavoidjudgmentortofreeaprisonerheldincustodyafterhistermofimprisonmenthasexpired.Stateexrel. @ Hallv.Meadows,215Tenn.668,675,389S.W.2d256,259(Tenn.1965).The   purposeofahabeascorpuspetitionistocontestvoidandnotmerelyvoidablejudgments.Archerv.State,851S.W.2d157,163(Tenn.1993).Habeascorpus $" reliefisavailableonlywhenitappearsonthefaceofthejudgmentorrecordofproceedingsuponwhichthejudgmentisrenderedthattheconvictingcourtwaswithoutjurisdictionorauthoritytosentencethedefendantorthatthedefendantssentencehasexpired.Id.at164. ,`'*  Inthisinstance,thepetitionerallegesthathissentencehasexpired.Wecannotagree.Thiscourthaspreviouslyaddressedtheissuesthepetitioner 1-0 raisesinthisappeal.SeeStateexrel.Stewartv.McWherter,857S.W.2d875  (Tenn.Crim.App.1992);JeromeSydneyBarrettv.State,No.02C019508CC  00233(Tenn.Crim.App.,Jackson,Feb.27,1997);PatrickSimpsonv.State,No. p 01C019203CR00098(Tenn.Crim.App.,Nashville,Nov.18,1992).񀀀Ourearlierrulingscontroltheresultsinthiscase. ThelanguageofTennesseeCodeAnnotatedsection4035117(c)isclear: ForallpersonswhocommittedcrimespriortoJuly1,1982,priorlawshallapplyandremaininfullforceandeffectineveryrespect,including,butnotlimitedto,sentencing,paroleandprobation.InStateexrel.Stewart,thiscourtheldthat  the 1989SentencingActprovidesthatitappliesonlytothoseoffenderswhoaresentencedafteritseffectivedateonNovember1,1989.Stateexrel.Stewart,857 P S.W.2dat876.Althoughthe1989Actbenefitedsomeoffenderswhocommittedtheircrimesbetween1982and1989,theActsprovisionsdonotapplytothepetitioner.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4035117(b)(1997).The1989Actdid notaffect @ rightsanddutiesthatmatured,penaltiesthatwereincurred,orproceedingsthatwerebegunbeforeitseffectivedate.1989Tenn.Pub.Actsch.591,115.Thusthepetitioner,whowasconvictedandsentencedpriortoJuly1,1982,remains underthepriorlaw...ineveryrespect,including,butnotlimitedto,sentencing,paroleandprobation.Tenn.CodeAnn.4035117(c). TennesseeCodeAnnotatedsection39114(1975),whichwasreplacedbysection391105(1982)andlaterbysection3911112(1989)doesnotrequirethestatetoreducehissentence.Thestatuteineffectatthetimeofthepetitionersconvictionprovidedthat8 Wheneveranypenalstatuteorpenallegislativeactofthestateisrepealedoramendedbyasubsequentlegislativeact,anyoffense,asdefinedbysuchstatuteoractbeingrepealedoramended,committedwhilesuchstatuteoractwasinfullforceandeffectshallbe P726 prosecutedundersuchactorstatuteineffectatthe @837 timeofthecommissionoftheoffense.Intheeventthesubsequentactprovidesforalesserpenalty,any  :p59 punishmentimposedshallbeinaccordancewiththesubsequentact.  x x Tenn.CodeAnn.39114(1975)(emphasisadded).Thisprovisionappliesonlytothosecasesinwhichtheaccusedistobeprosecutedunderthesubstantivelawineffectatthetimeoftheoffenseandanewstatute,callingforalesserpunishment,isenactedbeforetheimpositionofthepunishment.Stateexrel.  p  Stewart,857S.W.2dat877.Theterm prosecutiondoesnotincludeenforcement P  ofasentence.Barrett,No.02C019508CC00233,slipop.at5.Thestatuteisnot 0  relevanttothosecasesinwhichjudgmentwasenteredandsentenceimposedpriortopassageofthenewlaw.Id.The1989statuteisidenticaltotheearlierlaw  exceptthatitcontainsanadditionalclauseexcludingfromitsprovisionsthoseconvictedofoffensesbeforeJuly1,1982.  #  3      ׀Therefore,evenifthestatuteallowed ` forthereductionofapreviouslyimposedsentenceinsomecases,itwouldnotgrantrelieftothispetitioner.Thepetitionerisentitledtonoreductionofhissentenceunderthesestatutoryprovisions. NextweaddressthepetitionerscontentionthathissentenceviolateshisrightsundertheconstitutionsoftheUnitedStatesandtheStateofTennessee.ThegistofthepetitionersconstitutionalargumentisthathislengthiersentencedenieshimequalprotectionanddueprocessunderArticle11,section8oftheTennesseeConstitutionandtheFourteenthAmendmenttotheUnitedStatesConstitutionwhichprohibitlegislationthatprovidesfavorabletreatmenttoanyindividualorclassofindividuals.Equalprotectionrequiresthatallpersonssimilarlysituatedmustbetreatedalike.Stateexrel.Stewart,857S.W.2dat876. .0*- Legislatures,however,maytreataclassofpersonsdifferentlysolongastheclassificationhasareasonablerelationshiptoalegitimatestateinterest.Doev. 2-1 Norris,751S.W.2d834,841(Tenn.1988).InStateexrel.Stewart,thiscourtfound 4/3 thatthestatehasalegitimateinterestinpreservingthefinalityofcriminaljudgments.ReconsiderationofallcasesinvolvingsentencesimposedbeforeNovember1,1989butwhicharepresentlybeingservedbyconfinement,paroleorprobation,wouldconstituteopening avirtualPandorasboxthatwoulddisruptthejudicialsystem.{{Stateexrel.Stewart,zz857S.W.2dat877(quotingStateexrel. 0  BobbyL.Crumv.NedMcWherter,No.02C019108CC00181,slipop.at4(Tenn. `  Crim.App.,Jackson,May13,1992)).~~~~  #  4      ׀Becauseareasonablerelationshipexists @  betweenthelegislativedecisiontoexcludethosewhoweresentencedpriorto1982fromtheprovisionsofthe1989Actandsocietysinterestinpreventingawholesaledisruptionofthecriminaljusticesystem,theconstitutionalrighttoequalprotectionanddueprocessarenotviolated.  Inarelatedargument,thepetitionerassertsthatthegreatdisparitybetweenthesentenceheiscurrentlyservingandthatwhichhewouldserveunderthe1989ActcausespsychologicaltormentofmindaswellasofbodywhichamountstocruelandunusualpunishmentundertheEighthAmendmenttotheUnitedStatesConstitution.TheEighthAmendment,however,prohibitssentencesthataredisproportionatelyseverewhencomparedtothecrimecommitted.Solem $" v.Helm,463U.S.277,297,103S.Ct.3001,3011(1983)|;|}.}Thefactthatapenalty p&!$ isreducedbynewlegislationdoesnotmeanthatthesentenceunderthepriorlawwasdisproportionatetothesubjectcrime.Barrett,No.02C019508CC00233,slip 0*%( op.at7;PatrickSimpsonv.State,No.01C019203CR00098,slipop.at7(Tenn. ,`'* Crim.App.,Nashville,Nov.18,1992).Thepetitionerhascitednoauthoritytodemonstratethatalifesentenceisunconstitutionallydisproportionateforthe / +. offenseofseconddegreemurder.Wehavefoundnone.SeeSimpson,slipop.at  7.Wedonotfindthepetitionerssentenceconstitutionallyinfirm. Atrialcourtisnotrequiredtoconductaninquiryintotheallegationsraisedinapetitionforhabeascorpusifthepetitionfailstostateacognizableclaim.SeeStateexrel.Byrdv.Bomar,381S.W.2d280(Tenn.1964);Tenn.CodeAnn. `  2921109(1980).Apetitionerhastheburdenofestablishingbyapreponderanceoftheevidencethatthejudgmentisvoidorthathistermofimprisonmentisexpired.Passarellav.State,891S.W.2d619,627(Tenn.Crim.  App.1994). Inthisinstance,thepetitionerdoesnotallegethattheoriginaljudgmentisvoid,andhehasnotallegedanyfactsindicatingthathistermofimprisonmenthasexpired.Evenifeveryfactualallegationofhispetitionistakenastrue,heisnotentitledtohabeascorpusrelief.Thetrialcourtdidnoterrbydismissinghispetitionwithoutanevidentiaryhearing. Weaffirmthejudgmentofthetrialcourt.8   x x     h      p __________________________    h      p CURWOODWITT,JudgeCONCUR;:______________________________GARYR.WADE,PresidingJudge______________________________THOMAST.WOODALL,Judge