ÿWPC ‹EÑŽ“µ¡•Èð¾ê߯.ª•È®@ÅÓÎ$?k•('ܾ1ÌrVgoäýáGÌRÆÅLHæ-ølÏQ&GA(ùŶO”ÓÇUàþ/áJv¢ŽòÛ,ÃÎÖþÀÁ€¼~húÀ*yZ_XEÕëîÚŲX»> ¿w¾?'°<8æež¼Wkø)qÝ BÏ6‹´ýr!Þ±¨â”5¡FÜ ¡sÒ*÷þ@en Aîá3F~3j‚>vYµ—PTs| u«#ÓAÀö€çÀÉ ~›šÃ²º`™™ØºþmzYmÏ´¦Þï¾u/?]6 ?¦Ö$â\0´ÀÍÔ¢c¯µ¶¦®J¥*w“B6P2C;’? q!Œ®+£z×@¤šëò4„튅©~Vzi`+ ¬tb/@™%ðaŠ¡|ÒâwjX[Å8qõn€_?CôÒî¹пÍȱˆÜf¥›‚•¥õè#°™²g)ƼËåxˆ³NþoL„€­9µàfК) +@õΕî°FêâVŸT0õZKÚ8 …0·ŸÂŠ Dp¥¹›/–ÈÄô42Óœ3¹ús͈º>»Ë’‰68/åM ±ª¡9a ޤžºÔ2"ÖWXsüçòŸ ùA3Ì/Ë·Ài %¾^ Ä 0ˆÐU NXw¦4ª¾ zÍÒG  m  0D2 Æv Æ< Æ ÆÈ #ÉŽ NWU@Y™E¡UN£££££££££££££££££££££££bññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññññ 0ëùùùù Bää 0¤ D5¥ D-Ú 0K ASRÆ¥ 0¤k 0D A«SSSSSSS AŸþ»ƒs/Ï (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regularyö.ê:i¢×+003|x ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5˜\\IB01S02\CLERKJACÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0(ÖÃ9 Z‹(Times New Roman  (ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular- ù-(|G2?=$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ça»»dXXdé8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôã<ò»»Ô d(|38±$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ça»»dXXdé8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|38±$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ça»»dXXdé8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKX[Z‘ I&mage <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Ça»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼Ça»»»ÔÑ8€‹'XXdé»»d8ÑÑ  ÑÔ‡¼£U»»¼ÇaÔà@hhìàÔ‡îPú£UÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@òò%ìàAT€JACKSONÔ#†¼£U»îîPú+#ԈРÓ# ÐÓ  ÓAssigned€on€Briefs€September€9,€2003Ð öF ÐÔ‡Xê›X»¼£UÔÌò òÔ#†¼£U»XXê›'#ÔANTONIO€BONDS€v.€STATE€OF€TENNESSEEó óÐ ï? ÐÌò òÔ€Xê›X»¼£UÔDirect€ó óà@@½½ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Shelby€CountyÐ  ` Ðà@@øøìàNo.€P„26982€€€€€€Arthur€T.€Bennett,€JudgeÐ ú J ÐÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<Í ` AßÐ Î   ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€W2003„00260„CCA„R3„PC€€„€Filed€November€14,€Ô_Ô2003Ô_ÔÐ Ç  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<š` AßÐ ›ë  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThe€petitioner,€Antonio€Bonds,€appeals€the€dismissal€of€his€petition€for€post„conviction€relief€basedÐ “ã  Ðupon€its€filing€beyond€the€statute€of€limitations.€€He€argues€his€petition€was€timely€filed.€€We€holdÐ |Ì  Ðthat€for€purposes€of€the€€post„conviction€relief€statute€of€limitations,€the€final€action€of€the€TennesseeÐ eµ ÐSupreme€Court€is€the€date€of€its€denial€of€an€application€for€permission€to€appeal,€not€the€date€itÐ Nž Ðdenied€the€petition€to€rehear.€€Because€the€instant€petition€was€filed€more€than€one€year€from€the€dateÐ 7‡ Ðof€denial€of€the€application€for€permission€to€appeal,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€post„convictionÐ  p Ðcourt.Ô#†X‹'XXXê›ú#ÔÐ  Y ÐÓ¿ÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€Affirmedó óÐ Û+ ÐÌòòÓ  ÓJoe€G.€Riley,óó€J.,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòJerry€L.€Smith,€J.óó,€joined.€€òòGary€R.Ð ®þ ÐWade,€Ô_ÔP.J.Ô_Ô,óó€filed€a€dissenting€opinion.Ð —ç ÐÌAntonio€Bonds,€Henning,€Tennessee,€òòPro€Se.Ð i¹ ÐóóÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€John€H.€Bledsoe,€Assistant€Attorney€General;€Ð ;‹ Ðand€William€L.€Gibbons,€District€Attorney€General,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð $ t ÐÌÓgÓò òOPINIONÐ ö!F! ÐÌó óÓ  Óà  àA€Shelby€County€jury€convicted€the€petitioner€of€first€degree€murder,€and€he€was€sentencedÐ Ê## Ðto€life€imprisonment.€€This€court€affirmed€his€conviction.€€òòState€v.€Antonio€Bondsóó,€No.€W2000„Ð ³$ $ ÐÔ#adddÔ01242„CCA„R3„CD,€2001€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€LEXIS€610€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€Aug.€13,€2001,€at€Jackson).€Ð œ%ì % ÐòòóóÔ#ddadÔOn€December€27,€2001,€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€denied€his€application€for€permission€toÐ …&Õ!& Ðappeal.€€The€petitioner€filed€a€petition€to€rehear,€which€the€state€supreme€court€denied€on€FebruaryÐ n'¾"' Ð11,€2002.€€The€mandate€was€issued€February€12,€2002.Ð W(§#( ÐÌà  àOn€January€10,€2003,€the€petitioner€filed€his€petition€for€post„conviction€relief€alleging,€òòinterÐ )*y%* Ðaliaóó,€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel.€€The€post„conviction€court€dismissed€the€petition€as€untimelyÐ +b&+ Ðsince€it€was€not€filed€within€one€year€after€the€state€supreme€courtððs€original€denial€of€his€applicationÐ û+K', Ðâ âfor€permission€to€appeal.€€òòóóThe€petitioner€maintains€his€petition€was€submitted€within€the€statute€ofÐ ä,4(-ý Ðlimitations€since€it€was€filed€less€than€one€year€after€the€supreme€courtððs€denial€of€his€petition€toÐ ° Ðrehear.€€Ð ™é Ðâ âÌà  àFor€purposes€of€this€case,€a€petition€for€post„conviction€relief€must€be€filed€within€one€yearÐ k» Ðof€ð ðthe€final€action€of€the€highest€state€appellate€court€to€which€an€appeal€is€taken.ðð€€Tenn.€CodeÐ T¤ ÐAnn.€ðð€40„30„102(a)€(2003).€€The€issue€raised€in€this€appeal€is€whether€the€February€11,€2002,€orderÐ =  Ðdenying€the€petition€Ô#cdddÔto€rehear€the€denial€of€the€application€for€permission€to€appeal€was€the€ð ðfinalÐ & v Ðactionðð€of€the€Tennessee€Ô#ddcdÔSupreme€Court,€or€whether€that€courtððs€ð ðfinal€actionðð€occurred€onÐ  _ ÐDecember€27,€2001,€when€it€first€denied€the€petitionerððs€application€for€permission€to€appeal.€€TheÐ ø H Ðstate€contends€the€petition€to€rehear€did€not€toll€the€statute€of€limitations,€which€began€to€run€onÐ á 1  ÐDecember€27,€2001.€€We€agree€with€the€state.Ð Ê   ÐÌà  àIn€addition€to€fixing€a€one„year€statute€of€limitations€for€the€filing€of€a€post„convictionÐ œì  Ðpetition,€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€40„30„102(a)€(2003)€contains€a€statement€of€legislativeÐ …Õ  Ðpolicy€with€respect€to€post„conviction€proceedings.€€The€statute€provides:Ð n¾  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àThe€statute€of€limitations€shall€not€be€tolled€for€any€reason,€includingÐ @ Ðany€tolling€or€saving€provision€otherwise€available€at€law€or€equity.€Ð )y ÐTime€is€of€the€essence€of€the€right€to€file€a€petition€for€post„Ð b Ðconviction€relief€or€a€motion€to€reopen€established€by€this€chapter,Ð ûK Ðand€the€one„year€limitations€period€is€an€element€of€the€right€to€fileÐ ä4 Ðsuch€an€action€and€is€a€condition€upon€its€exercise.ÐÍ` x` x ÐÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„102(a)€(2003).Ð Ÿï ÐÌà  àThus,€it€is€apparent€that€the€legislature€intended€to€definitively€restrict,€rather€than€expand,Ð qÁ Ðthe€time€frame€within€which€post„conviction€proceedings€must€be€initiated.€€The€courts€shouldÐ Zª Ðinterpret€Ô#cdddÔthis€statute€in€a€way€that€furthers€that€policy€rather€than€undermines€it.€€òòSeeóó€òòCarter€v.€Stateóó,Ð C“ Ð952€S.W.2d€Ô#ddcdÔ417,€420€(Tenn.€1997)€(holding€petitioners€for€whom€statute€of€limitations€had€expiredÐ ,| Ðunder€the€old€Act€did€not€have€additional€time€to€file€under€the€new€Act).€€Of€course,€in€order€toÐ e Ðdetermine€when€the€one„year€statue€of€limitations€begins€to€run,€one€must€determine€when€theÐ þN Ðjudgment€of€the€highest€state€court€to€which€an€appeal€is€taken€becomes€final.€€We€address€this€issueÐ ç 7 Ðin€light€of€the€above„stated€legislative€policy.€€Ð Ð!   ÐÌà  àThis€court€has€held€that€for€purposes€of€the€one„year€statute€of€limitations€in€post„convictionÐ ¢#ò" Ðcases,€the€final€action€of€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€is€generally€either€the€date€that€court€deniesÐ ‹$Û# Ðan€application€for€permission€to€appeal€or€the€date€it€files€an€opinion€on€the€merits€of€the€case.€Ð t%Ä $ ÐòòSidney€McGlowan€v.€Stateóó,€No.€W2000„01925„CCA„R3„PC,€2001€Tenn.€Crim.€App.€LEXIS€935,Ð ]&­!% Ðat€*9€(Tenn.€Crim.€Ô#cdddÔApp.€Nov.€29,€2001,€at€Jackson).€€Certainly,€a€criminal€defendant€Ô#ddcdÔshould€not€beÐ F'–"& Ðable€to€extend€the€intended€statute€of€limitations€in€which€to€file€a€post„conviction€petition€by€timelyÐ /(#' Ðfiling€a€frivolous€petition€to€rehear€our€supreme€courtððs€denial€of€application€for€permission€toÐ )h$( Ðappeal.€€This€would€be€contrary€to€the€expressed€legislative€intent€of€Tennessee€Code€AnnotatedÐ *Q%) Ðsection€40„30„102(a)€(2003).Ð ê*:&* ÐÐ Ó+#'+ Ðà  àPerhaps€more€importantly,€the€language€of€Tennessee€Rule€of€Appellate€Procedure€39(a)Ð ° Ðgoverning€rehearing€provides€no€substantial€justification€for€filing€a€petition€to€rehear€the€denial€ofÐ ™é Ðan€application€for€permission€to€appeal.€€The€listed€bases€for€relief€on€a€petition€to€rehear€all€relateÐ ‚Ò Ðto€the€courtððs€ð ðopinion.ðð€€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€39(a).€€An€order€denying€application€for€permission€toÐ k» Ðappeal€is€not€an€opinion.€€We€do€note€the€Advisory€Commission€Comment€to€the€rule€states€theÐ T¤ Ðð ðSupreme€Court€generally€disfavors€petitions€to€rehear€following€denials€of€applications€forÐ =  Ðpermission€to€appeal.ðð€€However,€we€do€not€interpret€this€comment€as€specifically€authorizing€suchÐ & v Ðpetitions,€especially€as€it€would€relate€to€the€finality€of€its€denial€of€the€application€for€permissionÐ  _ Ðto€appeal.€€òòSeeóó€òòLaura€Coffey,€et€Ô#cdddÔal€v.€Cherokee€Aviation,€Inc.óó,€No.€E1999„01037„Ô_ÔCOAÔ_Ô„R3„CV,€2000Ð ø H ÐTenn.€App.€LEXIS€467,€at€**11„Ô#ddcdÔ12€Ô‡Xê›XXX‹'Ô(Tenn.€Ct.€App.Ô#†X‹'XXXê›g$#Ô€July€19,€2000,€at€Knoxville)€(noting€AdvisoryÐ á 1  ÐCommission€Comments€are€persuasive€authority€but€may€not€alter€the€clear€text€of€the€rule),€òòperm.Ð Ê   Ðto€app.€deniedóó€(Tenn€2001).Ð ³  ÐÌà  àTennessee€Rule€of€Appellate€Procedure€38€governs€entry€of€the€appellate€courtððs€òòjudgmentóóÐ …Õ  Ðfollowing€receipt€of€the€courtððs€òòopinionóó.€€Immediately€following€is€Rule€39€dealing€with€rehearings.€Ð n¾  ÐRule€39€speaks€in€terms€of€petitioning€to€rehear€the€appeal€based€on€inconsistencies€and/or€errorsÐ W§  Ðfound€in€the€appellate€courtððs€òòopinionóó.Ð @ ÐÌà  àFurther,€Tennessee€Rule€of€Appellate€Procedure€42(b)€provides€that€the€mandate€of€theÐ b ÐÔ#cdddÔintermediate€appellate€court€is€to€issue€ð ðimmediatelyðð€upon€the€denial€of€an€application€forÐ ûK Ðpermission€Ô#ddcdÔto€appeal€by€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court.€€Thus,€upon€denial€of€a€discretionary€appeal,Ð ä4 Ðthe€trial€court€is€immediately€given€direction€to€comply€with€the€judgment€of€the€intermediateÐ Í Ðappellate€court.€€In€addition,€the€rule€contains€no€provision€authorizing€a€stay€of€the€mandate€uponÐ ¶ Ðthe€filing€of€an€ð ðorder€of€the€Supreme€Court€denying€the€application€for€permission€to€appeal.ðð€Ð Ÿï ÐTenn.€R.€App.€P.€42(b).Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àWe€do€note€that€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€did€issue€an€order€in€this€case,€which€simplyÐ Zª Ðstated€the€petition€to€rehear€was€denied,€and€the€mandate€was€issued€thereafter.€€Nevertheless,€weÐ C“ Ðplace€no€significance€upon€these€facts€as€it€would€relate€to€the€finality€of€its€action€in€denying€theÐ ,| Ðapplication€for€permission€to€appeal.€€The€final€action€of€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court,€for€purposesÐ e Ðof€triggering€the€statute€of€limitations,€was€the€date€it€denied€the€application€for€permission€toÐ þN Ðappeal.Ð ç 7 ÐÌà  àWe,€therefore,€conclude€the€post„conviction€petition€was€untimely.€€The€judgment€of€theÐ ¹" ! Ðpost„conviction€court€is€affirmed.Ô‡Xê›XXX‹'ÔÐ ¢#ò" ÐÌÌÌòòóóà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à____________________________________€Ð F'–"& Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àJOE€G.€RILEY,€JUDGEÔ#†X‹'XXXê›™-#Ô