WPC[! >d!a` 'йU}v}mb!$Ek`9%$ WCSN&ĈlsǏ+Ţ'+0+X(BHڢvO BHՊ߭ ՗gT}c5 q;`>D+:18U6S 0p;ff C\6aT+Yq2nu_t77mT%^Kg{]-PE ;>d {*F9۲Yw?zN;Xϱ>0=8H<g9<*4# H8r/PIɛ9},z4|1n%:gueUi= ^ sqht&UGU>  0  0 0rM 0 0< 0< 0:N 0 0h 0 0 o 0Vv 0uU H* 0r D+' AwR 0 B[ D3x 0(q AMo)@o)@ %"""8"Z"|"""""&"H"j""""""6 B-X 0#/U NM> (B Nj bl U@t j ^ !w*!4.!B! mD!\  `&Times New Roman'  BADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THEB0ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE .   6B 54Heading 1XXX       6/ 4Heading 2         6 4Heading 3     6Z z4Heading 4  ) p x (#)     VLX` hp x (#V<:Default Para<:Footnote Ref:8Page Number0G .Footer (#G=X` hp x (#G6 4Body Text    <%% :Body Text In X      X ." ,Title      4 2Subtitle    fV)..      :X:X:  _  XYGXXYGXXXYG $ (#X$  ,     XXYG(2fV$ 89 !..      : X:X :   *`0Baskerville Old Face(2fV$ 89 !..      : X:X :   'dxdo&"D&raw Object Text <C HKKKK  fV"..      :X:X:  K(XK?+ ` hp x X?XYGXN>: \ Kp.1E J J ?   (2fV$ 89 !..      : X:X :     d'dxd Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5($A<< cWPC.1.1!.1 j  u  "- "--$ ~ ~ ~ ~ --  fV"..      :X:X:  K(XKXYGX N>: \ Kp.1E J J ?   WPC.1.1!.1 j  u  "- "--$ ~ ~ ~ ~ -- :X         H          H          H          H          H          H          H          H          H )Hairline d#|x(r9 $..      : TX:X T: THP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL 6,,,,0(uH Z6Times New Roman Regular- -(mK Z(Times New Roman  `#Xd# ?       H ۰{+ J~'ng ȝU 89 !..      :X:X:  _       H8dd8  3 p x (#X3XYGX@XYGXXXYG  AQhh@}X@XYG@@}INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @}@  < p x (#X(#<    @@}& + X  Qgg$ATNASHVILLE#@}@#X  Ԍ  Ќ  0X(#X(#0@@}  @}@  < p x (#X(#<      B  ԍATNASHVILLE  C    K.` hp x (#X(#KAssignedonBriefsJuly18,2001'+݌ > Ќ  *X(#X(#*@@}    @}@STATEOFTENNESSEEv.DEAN_BYARD_#@@}%#   i @XYGX@ DirectAppealfromtheCriminalCourtforDavidsonCounty  [ No.99C1782SethW.Norman,Judge  A -  @X@XYG@ cSO~ K p X@E K V K-  XYGXXYGXXXYG @XYGXXXYGNo.M200001410CCAR3CDFiledNovember27,2001   -  @X@XYG@ aQM~ K p @X@Ed K Vd K-  XYGXXYGXXXYG           @XYGXXXYG  ݌̌          L   Defendantappealsfromabenchtrialwherehewasfoundguiltyofonecountofassaultandone ? countofaggravatedassault.Sufficientevidenceexiststosupporttheconvictionofaggravated %u assault.Theineffectiveassistanceofcounselclaimiswhollyunsubstantiated.Weaffirmthe  [ judgmentsfromthetrialcourt. L ݌ A Ќ    Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentsoftheCriminalCourtAffirmed      JohnEverettWilliams,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichGaryR.Wade,P.J.,  andJosephM.Tipton,J.,joined. o SamE.Wallace,Jr.,Nashville,Tennessee,fortheappellant,DeanByard. ; PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneralandReporter;JenniferL.Bledsoe,AssistantAttorney W General;VictorS.(Torry)JohnsonIII,DistrictAttorneyGeneral;andLisaAngelaNaylor, = AssistantDistrictAttorneyGeneral,fortheappellee,StateofTennessee. # Ѐ       OPINION  "" n  X    K.` hp x (#X(#K   Defendant,DeanByard,waivedhisrighttotrialbyajuryandproceededwithabench Q$$ trial.ThetrialjudgefounddefendantguiltyofonecountofassaultofPatriciaHaleyand 7% % imposedasentenceofelevenmonthsandtwentyninedays.Defendantwasalsofoundguiltyof &m!& onecountofaggravatedassaultofGlendaBryson,wassentencedtothreeyears,andwasplaced 'S"' inacommunitycorrectionsprogram.Thesentenceswereorderedtobeservedconcurrently. '9#( Defendantdidnotsubmitamotionfornewtrialtothetrialcourt.Rather,hesubmitshisissues ($) forappealtothiscourtondirectreviewandrequestsanewtrial.Defendantcorrectlypointsout )%* thatthemotionforanewtrialisnotnecessarywhenthetrialwashadbeforeajudgewithout *%+ interventionofajury,asisthecasehere.UnitedStatesv.DeCoster,159U.S.App.D.C.326, +&, 487F.2d1197(1973);Baxterv.Rose,523S.W.2d930(Tenn.1975).Defendantcontends(1) g,'- A A8YGXXdd8?HH A  _thatinsufficientevidenceexiststosupporthisconvictionofaggravatedassaultand(2)thathe  receivedineffectiveassistanceofcounsel. N݌  Ќ   X           FACTS  ݌ b Ќ    X ThetrialproceedingsrevealthatdefendantandMs.PattyHaleyweremarriedon . ~ September6,1997,anddivorcedonSeptember10,1999.Thepartieswereseparatedduring  d 1998.AccordingtoMs.Haleystestimony,onJuly18,1998,thepartiesmetintheparkinglot  J ofChristChurchonOldHickoryBoulevardinNashville.Ms.Haleyagreedtomeetwith  0 defendanttodiscussreconciling.Shefurthertestifiedthatwhenshetriedtoleave,defendant    grabbedherarm,jerkedheraround,andthengrabbedherneck.Shealsostatedthatashepulled    her,shefelltotheground.ShefinallywasabletogetupandusehercelltelephonetocallMs.   GlendaBryson.Ms.HaleytestifiedthatatthistimedefendantgrabbedMs.XYGXX@XYG@XYGXXXYGHaleys#XYGXX@XYG#Ԁ@XYGXXXYGcell x  telephonefromher.Ms.Haleythenranintothechurchandcalledthepolicefromtheyouth ^  ministerXYGXX@XYG@XYGXXXYGs#XYGXX@XYG;#Ԁ@XYGXXXYGoffice. D   X X$%Ms.BrysontestifiedthatwhenshereceivedthetelephonecallfromMs.Haley,Ms. ` Haleywasactinghystericalandclaimedthatdefendantwasbeatingher.Atthattime,Ms. F Brysonhungupandcalled911,requestingthatpolicebesenttothechurch.Shortlythereafter, , Ms.Brysonalsodrovetothechurch.Shetestifiedthatasshegotabouthalfwayuptheentrance  ofthechurch,shesawdefendantsittinginhistruck.Shetestifiedthatdefendantstartedcoming  towardherreallyfastinhistruck,anditseemedhewasnotgoingtostop.Ms.Brysonstated  thatshewasafraiddefendantwasgoingtohitherwhiledrivinghistruck.Sheputhercarin t reverse,backedoutintotwolanesoftrafficwithoutevenlooking,andpulledintoanother Z entrancethatwentupbehindthechurch.Shethendrovebehindthechurchandmadeasecond @ 911call.Ms.Brysonalsotestifiedthatshedidnotnoticeifdefendantfollowedheror &v proceededoutoftheexitofthechurchandawayfromthechurch.  \  X XDefendanttestifiedthatuponmeetingMs.HaleyatChristChurch,sheaskedhimfor ( money.Defendantstatedthatuponhisrefusal,Ms.HaleyXYGXX@XYG@XYGXXXYGԀ justwentcrazyand started  throwingafit.Hefurtherstatedthatheaskedhertocalmdownandheldherhand.Hethen  releasedherhandandsheraninsidethechurch.HeclaimedhedidnotstrikeMs.Haleyor   chokeher,andthatshehadhercelltelephonewhensheraninsidethechurch.Headmittedthat p!  hegrabbedMs.Haleyswristbecauseshewas throwingafitandholleringandscreaming.He V"! saidhewastryingtocalmherdown.HealsoclaimedthatMs.Haleydidnotusehercell <#" telephonetocallanyone.Lastly,defendanttestifiedthatafterMs.Haleyraninsidethechurch, "$r# defendantleftthechurch,andthathedidnotseeMs.Bryson.Hefurtherdeniedthatheever %X $ drovetowardMs.Brysonasshedroveuptheentrancetothechurch. %>!%  &$"& &'Defendantwasaskedoncrossexaminationifheshouldbebelieved.Defendantstated ' #' thathewastellingthetruth.Whenaskedifhealwaystoldthetruth,hereplied, [w]ell,Itryto. (#( HeadmittedthathewasconvictedonNovember20,1998,oftheftofpropertybetween$1,000 )$) and$10,000.HealsoadmittedthathewasconvictedonAugust15,1991,offorgery.However, l*%* hedidnotrecallbeingconvictedinFebruaryof1998offraudulentbreachoftrust.Allofthese R+&+ convictionsarereflectedinhiscriminalrecord. 8,', #$%&'# $ %$HH &% '&HH '   ' (#X(#'  XH.` hp x (# XH 4+   4++݌̌$ X(#X(#$         X   4,  StanMitchell,theassociatepastorofChristChurch,testifiedthatonthedayinquestion,  theyouthpastorbroughtMs.Haleytohisoffice.Ms.HaleytoldMr.Mitchellthatsheand | defendanthadanargumentinthechurchparkinglot.Mr.MitchellstatedthatMs.Haley b claimeddefendantgrabbedherforcefully;however,Mr.Mitchelldidnotobserveany H fingerprintsorbruisesonMs.Haleysneck.Mr.Mitchellalsotestifiedthatseveraldaysafter . ~ thedayoftheallegedincident,hehadaconversationwithdefendant.Atthattimedefendant  d deniedattemptingtochokeMs.Haley,butstatedthathehadgrabbedherbytheshouldersand  J mighthavegrabbedherabouttheneckbecause,asMr.Mitchellstated,theywereina  0  flammatoryargument.MitchellalsostatedthathedidnotrememberMs.Brysoncominginto    hisoffice,andthatMs.HaleyhadbeenintheyouthministersofficepriortobeinginMr.    Mitchellsoffice. 4,,݌   Ќ     x        X 1  ANALYSIS 11݌ ^  Ќ               2  I.  SUFFICIENCYOFEVIDENCEONCHARGEOFAGGRAVATEDASSAULT 22݌ *z  Ќ     2   3  X() Defendantfirstassertsthattheevidenceonthechargeofaggravatedassaultwas F insufficientforafindingofguilt.Wedisagree.Whenchallengingthesufficiencyofevidence,a , defendantisburdenedwithshowingwhytheevidenceisinsufficienttosupporttheverdict  returnedbythetrieroffact.Statev.Freeman,943S.W.2d25,29(Tenn.Crim.App.1996).The  verdictwillnotbedisturbed,unless,asamatteroflaw,thefactsaresoinsufficientthatarational  trieroffactcouldnotfindguiltbeyondareasonabledoubt.Tenn.R.App.P.13(e). t Additionally,theverdictofajudgeinabenchtrialisaccordedthesameweightonappealasa Z juryverdict.Statev.Holder,15S.W.3d905,911(Tenn.Crim.App.1999);Statev.Hatchett, @ 560S.W.2d627,630(Tenn.1978).33݌ &v Ќ    \ InTennessee,assaultoccurswhensomeone intentionallyorknowinglycausesanother B toreasonablyfearimminentbodilyinjury.Tenn.CodeAnn.3913101(a)(2).Theact ( becomesaggravatediftheperson usesordisplaysadeadlyweapon.Tenn.CodeAnn.39  13102(a)(1).CasesinTennesseeholdthatanautomobilecanbeadeadlyweapon.Statev.  Hurst,No.W199901860CCAR3CD,2000WL1140783,at*3(Tenn.Crim.App.,filedAug.   3,2000,atJackson),perm.app.denied(Tenn.Jan.2,2001);seeStatev.Tate,912S.W.2d785, p!  78788(Tenn.Crim.App.1995). V"!  X XIntheinstantcase,Ms.Brysontestifiedthatshesawdefendantstruckinthedrivewayas "$r# shepulledintotheentranceofChristChurch.Shefurthertestifiedthatdefendantbegandriving %X $ towardsher reallyfastinhistruckanddidntlooklikehewasgoingtostop.Ms.Bryson %>!% statedthatshewasafraiddefendantwasgoingtorunintoher.Shestatedthatshewassoafraid &$"& thatsheproceededtobackoutofthechurchparkinglotandintotwolanesoftrafficwithout ' #' evenlooking. (#(  X  X*+  Wenotethatinanytrialthedutyofthefactfinderistoweighthetestimonyofthe l*%* witnessesandmakeadeterminationastowhichwitnessesaretobebelievedandwhattestimony R+&+ istobeaccredited.SeeStatev.Howard,926S.W.2d579,585(Tenn.Crim.App.1996).Thisis 8,', #()*+# ( )(HH *) +*HH +  thedutyofthetrialjudgeinabenchtrial,becausethetrialjudgeisinthepositiontolistentoand  observefirsthandthetestimonyofthewitnesses.Therefore,greatweightisgiventothetrial  judgesconclusions.InlightofMs.Brysonstestimonythatshewasafraidandbelieved | defendantwouldrunintoher,weleavetheissueofdefendantsintenttothetrialjudgeandfind b sufficientevidenceuponwhichtobaseaguiltyverdict.Wewillnotsubstitutethetrialcourts H judgmentwiththatofourown.Weaffirmthedecision. . ~   d  X II.   INEFFECTIVEASSISTANCEOFCOUNSEL   J  XDefendantassertsonappealthathiscounselwasineffectivefortworeasons.Therecord    reflectsthatcounseldidnotsubpoenavariouscelltelephonerecordsorobjecttotheintroduction    ofportionsoftheStatesproof.Defendantassertsthatthecelltelephonerecordswouldhave   shownthatcertaintelephonecallswerenevermadeonthedayoftheallegedassaulteventhough x  Ms.HaleyandMs.Brysontestifiedthatthecallsweremade.Also,defendantfindsfaultinthat ^  counselshouldhaveobjectedtotheStatesintroductionofapriorconvictiontoimpeach D  defendant. *z   ` ,-Wenotethatdefendantisassertinghisclaimsofineffectiveassistanceofcounselon F directappeal.Defendantdoessowithoutahearingonamotionforanewtrialorsubmittingany , evidencetothetrialcourt.Ondirectappeal,adefendantmayseektohavetheeffectivenessof  counselreviewedsolelyontherecord.However,thiscourthascautionedthatsuchpracticeis  "fraughtwithperil."Statev.Sluder,No.1236,1990WL26552,at*8(Tenn.Crim.App.,Mar.  14,1990,atKnoxville),perm.app.denied(Tenn.July16,1990).Proceedingonan t ineffectivenessclaimwithoutanevidentiaryhearingmakesitpracticallyimpossibleto Z demonstrateprejudiceasrequiredinineffectiveassistanceclaims.Stricklandv.Washington, @ 466U.S.668,687,104S.Ct.2052(1984). &v Ѐ  \ Thiscourtreviewsaclaimofineffectiveassistanceofcounselunderthestandardsof B StricklandandBaxterv.Rose,523S.W.2d930(Tenn.1975).Thedefendanthastheburdento ( provethat(1)theattorneysperformancewasdeficient,and(2)thedeficientperformance  resultedinprejudicetothedefendantsoastodeprivehimofafairtrial.Strickland,466U.S.at  687,104S.Ct.at2064;Goadv.State,938S.W.2d363,369(Tenn.1996);Overtonv.State,874   S.W.2d6,11(Tenn.1994);Butlerv.State,789S.W.2d898,899(Tenn.1990). p!   V"! ThetestinTennesseetodeterminewhethercounselprovidedeffectiveassistanceis <#" whetherhisperformancewaswithintherangeofcompetencedemandedofattorneysincriminal "$r# cases.Baxter,523S.W.2dat936.Thedefendantmustovercomethepresumptionthatcounsels %X $ conductfallswithinthewiderangeofacceptableprofessionalassistance.Strickland,466U.S.at %>!% 689,104S.Ct.at2065;Hicksv.State,983S.W.2d240,246(Tenn.Crim.App.1998);Alleyv. &$"& State,958S.W.2d138,149(Tenn.Crim.App.1997).Therefore,inordertoproveadeficiency, ' #' adefendantmustshowthatcounselsactsoromissionsweresoseriousastofallbelowan (#( objectivestandardofreasonablenessunderprevailingprofessionalnorms.Strickland,466U.S. )$) at688,104S.Ct.at2065;Henleyv.State,960S.W.2d572,579(Tenn.1997);Goad,938 l*%* S.W.2dat369. R+&+ ./ 8,', #,-./# , -,HH .- /.HH /  Inreviewingcounselsconduct,a fairassessment...requiresthateveryeffortbemade  toeliminatethedistortingeffectsofhindsight,toreconstructthecircumstancesofcounsels  challengedconduct,andtoevaluatetheconductfromcounselsperspectiveatthetime. | Strickland,466U.S.at689,104S.Ct.at2065.Thefactthataparticularstrategyortacticfailed b orhurtthedefense,doesnot,standingalone,establishunreasonablerepresentation.However, H deferencetomattersofstrategyandtacticalchoicesappliesonlyifthechoicesareinformedones . ~ baseduponadequatepreparation.Goad,938S.W.2dat369;Hellardv.State,629S.W.2d4,9  d (Tenn.1982);Alley,958S.W.2dat149;Cooperv.State,847S.W.2d521,528(Tenn.Crim.  J App.1992).  0      @XYGXX@XYG      W  FailuretoSubpoenaCellTelephoneRecords WhW pPWԌ    Ќ  @XYGXX@XYG  @XYGXX@XYG        XCX  B  ԍFailuretoSubpoenaCellPhoneRecords pXC  X01 Whenadefendantcontendsthattrialcounselfailedtodiscover,interview,orpresent x  witnessesinsupportofhisdefense,thesewitnessesshouldbepresentedbythedefendantatthe ^  evidentiaryhearing.Blackv.State,794S.W.2d752,757(Tenn.Crim.App.1990);seealso D  Scottv.State,936S.W.2d271,273(Tenn.Crim.App.1996).Asageneralrule,thisistheonly *z  waythedefendantcanestablishthat(a)amaterialwitnessexistedandthewitnesscouldhave ` beendiscoveredbutforcounselsneglectinhisinvestigationofthecase,(b)aknownwitness F wasnotinterviewed,(c)thefailuretodiscoverorinterviewawitnessinuredtohisprejudice,or , (d)thefailuretohaveaknownwitnesspresentorcallthewitnesstothestandresultedinthe  denialofcriticalevidencewhichinuredtotheprejudiceofthedefendant.Black,794S.W.2dat  757.Neitherthetrialcourtnorthiscourtcanspeculateonwhatawitnesstestimonymighthave  beenifintroducedbycounsel.Id.CXX݌ t Ќ  @XYGXX@XYG  X Z  XWeagainnotethatthiscauseisbroughttousondirectappeal.Assuch,aposttrial @ evidentiaryhearingastotheeffortsofdefensecounselwasneverconductedandnofindings &v regardingsuchexist.Thereisnorecordregardinganineffectiveassistanceofcounselclaimand  \ norecordcontaininganytestimonyofdefendantsattorney.Forthesereasons,thiscourtcannot B becertainthatanysupposedcelltelephonerecordswouldhaveeitherprejudiceddefendantor ( helpeddefendant.Forwhateverreason,itispossiblethatcounseldidnotwanttodrawattention  totherecordsorsimplyfoundthemtobeirrelevant.Becausenootherproofexists,thiscourt  doesnotcaretoandwillnotspeculateastoeithertheexistenceofthecelltelephonerecordsor   theirsupposedeffectonthetrialcourtsfindings.Thisissueiswithoutmerit. p!  @XYGXX@XYG       Xb  b_c fi6cԌ̌  @XYGXX@XYG  B  C    FailuretoObjecttoConvictionsNotIncludedinStatesNotice "$r# d@XYGXX@XYG      d  dd݌̌  @XYGXX@XYG    X     ne  DefendantalsoassertsthatcounselshouldhaveobjectedtotheStatesuseofaprevious &$"& convictionforthepurposeofimpeachment.Duringthepretrialdiscoveryphase,theState ' #' respondedtodefendantsrequestfordiscoveryandfiledawrittennoticeofitsintenttouse (#( defendantspriorconvictionsforimpeachmentpurposes.Subsequently,theStategavespecific )$) noticepursuanttoTennesseeRulesofEvidence609and405concerningonlyoneprior l*%* convictionfortheftofpropertybetween$1,000$10,000onNovember20,1998. nee݌ R+&+ Ќ   X    X     h   h#i݌ 8,',  01 0 10HH 1  ь   X  23  X     Lj  Attrial,defendantwasaskedifhealwaystoldthetruth.Defendantanswered, [w]ell,I  try.TheStatethenproceededtoimpeachdefendantwiththeNovember1998convictionfor  theftandtwootherconvictionsforforgeryandfraudulentbreachoftrust,bothofwhichare | reflectedindefendantscriminalrecord.Defendantcontendsthattheconvictionsofforgeryand b fraudulentbreachoftrustmaynotbeusedforimpeachmentpurposes.Wedisagree. Ljj݌ H Ќ   X    X     Pm  TennesseeRuleofEvidence609(a)(3)providesthat"theStatemustgivetheaccused  d reasonablewrittennoticeoftheimpeachingconvictionbeforetrial."Thismeansthatthestate  J mustnotifytheappellantinwritingthatitintendstouseapriorconvictiontoimpeachthe  0 accused'scredibilityattrial.Statev.Farmer,841S.W.2d837,839(Tenn.Crim.App.1992).In    thecaseofStatev.Barnard,899S.W.2d617(Tenn.Crim.App.1994),theprosecutorfailedto    providenoticeofintenttouseapriorconvictionoftheaccused.However,hedidgivea   discoveryresponseoutliningdefendantscriminalrecord.Theevidencewasadmittedand x  defendantappealed.Thiscourtfoundthatdefendantwasnotprejudicedandtheerrorwas ^  harmless.Barnard,899S.W.2dat622. Pmm݌ D  Ќ   X    X     q  Inthiscase,althoughtheactualnoticerequirementofRule609(a)(3)wasnotsatisfied ` becausethestatefailedtoinformtheappellantofitsintentiontousethepriorconvictionsfor F impeachmentpurposes,defendantdoesnotappeartohavebeenundulyprejudicedbythestate's , noncompliance.TheState,initsanswerstodefendantspretrialrequestfordiscovery,  submitteddefendantspriorrecord.Thefactthatdefendantscounseldidnotobjecttothe  introductionofthisevidenceisofnoconsequence.Therewasnoundueprejudice;hence,this  issueiswithoutmerit. q#r݌ t Ќ   X  45   u  uu݌̌  &           Qv  B  C  CONCLUSIONQvv݌ &v Ќ     Ev     Rw  Rww݌̌     XAccordingly,weaffirmthejudgmentsfromthetrialcourt.'&-v B  X ' (#X(#'    H.` hp x (# XH x   x$y݌̌$ X(#X(#$   ' (#X(#'   y  ____________________________________ yy݌ <#" Ќ' X(# X'  E.` hp x (#X(#E ' (#X(#'     z  ݀JOHNEVERETTWILLIAMS,JUDGE z{݌ "$r# Ќ' X(# X'  #XYGXX@XYG##XXYG