ÿWPCn fkuäP§p-_&)MÎ-`§Ûq-›Ã›ìqùK´6ß7C²é¶šÍ§°—V¿À4©sË](@Äšïê… c 7ËܺN©ã  ‚ÏJ_ºWÈo”ÞŽƒW!¯¨µO•’‹´í—Deˆ\ðŸ’Uk¿ý`Q®&BÔ6O4æ'JE³»†?yHÕ«{5\yb¶uß+WÀ£þt—Ó ÀïÚÿeM3) ¿·KšA‰Oò}r Èè£'Rßn'fhŸÕ<\äN|jôg¸«³Í”Æ•4˜ }¤‰V€tËÎ]D‘ú=d Ù¯¼q¶,Ȱ/¢06˜Â=þ¬ ù#(TbñÈZE#!rŽkÍ›hEw"ž»Ÿ°ýý0j"û”nÚÙQUŽ¡}jвoL¶f×ô3_G œ&6ÚšÖ3º|+xRQ=/zýI‹¿ÊŒ”˜È¨ô»µÐw©—.¸¥‘`ìêeF²“½¿².–´~¦ò Y4Á1Ƙ÷]OŽtmêïMQ¿ë©Æ¨ÊNVFÏz‚VA:AÚJ6ð›ª}TÌs§>ÛU;THö´Õ?«Ê€W×2ÑzŒlGÏùíuV"‡.Áls Tm·R̾94©s¾øb %\#b 0ˆ…UN â[ UN= ‹ z¢ Ò^ îwú4þÆ!ÆçÆ­Æs9N; m=#ÉTE 0Dbcccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccccc 0ëkkkk BVV 0¤s D3 D-J 0Kww ASÂÆ 0¤Û 0D A«Ã» Ý ƒRC‘$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¯)ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€Defendant€filed€his€petition€for€post„conviction€relief€on€January€25,€1991.€€The€hearing€on€the€petitionÐ ° Ðwas€held€in€October€2002.(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular ØÝ ƒRC‘$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¯)ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔDuring€his€opening€statement,€Mr.€Rutherford€claimed€that€Ms.€Ô_ÔAdkinsÔ_Ô€had€ð ðgoaded€[the€Defendant]€into€goingÐ ° Ðback€out€to€Ms.€Gibsonððs€house,ðð€thereby€implicitly€admitting€that€the€Defendant€had€been€with€Ms.€Ô_ÔAdkinsÔ_Ô€at€the€crimeÐ tÄ Ðscene.(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular Ý ƒRC‘$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¯)ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔIn€1995,€Tennesseeððs€Post„Conviction€Procedure€Act,€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€40„30„101€et€seq.,Ð ° Ðwas€amended€to€require€the€petitioner€to€prove€his€or€her€grounds€for€post„conviction€relief€by€ð ðclear€and€convincingððÐ tÄ Ðevidence.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€Ô‡ô¯)òòô¯)Ô40„30„110(f)òòóó.Ô#†ô¯)òòô¯)¸#Ô ˜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.wpt4¤j1Þ óbï.ê:i¢Ø+003|xLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ˜\\IB01S08\KNOXCLERK3ÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó- ù-(|G2C‘$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Á»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô¯)ò»»Ô d(|3ÿy$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Á»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3ÿy$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Á»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€Á»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼Á»»»ÔÑ8€K5XXdì»»d8Ñà@ttìàÔ‡îÜÁÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼Á»îîÜ #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àSeptember€28,€2004€SessionÐ üL ÐÔ‡XK5X»¼ÁÔÌò òÔ#†¼Á»XXK5#ÔBRIAN€SHANE€CALDWELL€v.€STATE€OF€TENNESSEEÔ‡XK5X»¼ÁÔó óÐ úJ ÐÌò òAppeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Knox€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€43082€€€€€€Richard€Ô_ÔBaumgartnerÔ_Ô,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E2003„02122„CCA„MR3„PC€„€Filed€November€10,€Ô_Ô2004Ô_ÔÐ ¥õ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThe€Defendant,€Brian€Shane€Caldwell,€was€convicted€by€a€jury€of€first€degree€felony€murder€and€firstÐ xÈ  Ðdegree€burglary.€€He€was€sentenced€to€concurrent€terms€of€life€imprisonment€and€ten€years,Ð d´ Ðrespectively.€€The€Defendantððs€convictions€and€sentences€were€affirmed€on€direct€appeal.€€òòSeeóó€òòStateÐ P  Ðv.€Brian€Shane€Caldwellóó,€No.€1176,€1988€WL€94393€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.,€Knoxville,€Sept.€13,€1988).€Ð <Œ ÐThe€Defendant€subsequently€filed€for€post„conviction€relief׃×Ý ƒ+#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€alleging,€òòinteróó€òòaliaóó,€that€he€had€receivedÐ (x Ðineffective€assistance€of€counsel€at€trial.€€After€an€evidentiary€hearing,€the€trial€court€denied€relief;Ð d Ðthis€appeal€followed.€€We€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.€€Ð P ÐÓ·ÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€Affirmedó óÐ Ø( ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼Á»àXK5ˆ#ÔÔ‡XK5X.¼ÁÔDavid€H.€Welles,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòJoseph€M.€Ô_ÔTiptonÔ_Ôóó€and€òòJohnÐ ° ÐEverett€Williams,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð œì ÐÌRichard€W.€Clark,€III,€Knoxville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Brian€Shane€Caldwell.Ð tÄ ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Seth€P.€Ô_ÔKestnerÔ_Ô,€Assistant€Attorney€General;Ð L œ ÐRandall€E.€Ô_ÔNicholsÔ_Ô,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Marsha€Mitchell,€Assistant€District€AttorneyÐ 8!ˆ  ÐGeneral,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð $"t! ÐÓõÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼Á»XXK5$ #ÔÔ‡XK5X»¼ÁÔÐ ü#L# ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼Á»XXK5< #ÔÔ‡XK5X»¼ÁÔÓ  Óà  àA€brief€review€of€the€facts€adduced€at€the€Defendantððs€trial€will€be€helpful.€€òòSeeóó€òògenerallyóóÐ Ô%$!% ÐòòCaldwellóó,€1988€WL€94393Ô#†¼Á»XXK5š #ÔÔ‡XK5X»¼ÁÔ.€€The€Defendant€rented€an€upstairs€apartment€from€the€victim,€sixty„Ð À&"& Ðseven„year„old€Lucille€Gibson.€€Ms.€Gibson€lived€in€the€lower€rooms€of€the€house€in€which€theÐ ¬'ü"' Ðapartment€was€located.€€On€the€day€the€Defendant€moved€in,€he€had€an€argument€with€Ms.€GibsonÐ ˜(è#( Ðâ âin€which€she€accused€him€of€having€stolen€some€of€her€keys€and€some€money.€€As€a€result€of€thisÐ „)Ô$)ý ÐÔ_Ôargument,€Ms.€Gibson€ordered€the€Defendant€to€vacate€the€apartment.€€The€Defendant€demanded€hisÐ ° Ðrent€money€be€returned,€but€Ms.€Gibson€refused€to€do€so.Ð œì Ðâ âÌà  àLater€that€night,€according€to€the€Stateððs€proof,€the€Defendant€returned€to€Ms.€GibsonððsÐ tÄ Ðresidence€with€his€girlfriend,€Diana€Adkins.€€According€to€Ms.€Adkins,€the€Defendant€intended€toÐ `° Ðrecover€his€rent€money.€€After€arriving€at€Ms.€Gibsonððs€residence,€the€Defendant€and€Ms.€AdkinsÐ L œ Ðentered€her€room.€€The€Defendant€restrained€Ms.€Gibson€and€placed€a€nightcap€in€her€throat.€€Ms.Ð 8 ˆ ÐGibson€eventually€suffocated.€€The€Defendant€ransacked€Ms.€Gibsonððs€living€quarters,€taking€aÐ $ t Ðtelevison€set,€some€hot€rollers,€and€a€curling€iron.€€The€Defendant€and€Ms.€Adkins€then€left€the€scene.Ð  ` ÐÌà  àMs.€Adkinsðð€brother,€John€Adkins,€also€testified.€€He€stated€that€the€Defendant€had€admitted€Ð è 8  Ðto€him€that€he€killed€the€victim.Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àRhonda€Knight€testified€on€behalf€of€the€defense€that€Ms.€Adkins€told€her€that€she€had€placedÐ ¬ü  Ðthe€nightcap€in€the€victimððs€mouth.Ð ˜è  ÐÌà  àThe€Stateððs€case€rested€heavily€on€the€testimony€of€Ms.€Adkins,€who€was€about€sixteen€yearsÐ pÀ Ðof€age€at€the€time€of€the€murder.€€Although€she€was€admittedly€at€the€scene€of€the€crimes,€she€wasÐ \¬ Ðnot€charged€with€any€criminal€offense.€€Nevertheless,€during€its€deliberations,€the€jury€queried€of€theÐ H˜ Ðtrial€court€whether€it€could€find€Ms.€Adkins€guilty€of€anything.Ð 4„ ÐÌà  àThe€State€sought€the€death€penalty€against€the€Defendant€for€Ms.€Gibsonððs€murder.€Ð  \ ÐAccordingly,€the€Defendant€was€assigned€two€trial€lawyers€for€his€defense:€€Glen€Rutherford€andÐ øH ÐRaymond€Shirley,€Jr.€€Mr.€Shirley€stated€that€the€defense€team€was€convinced€that€Ms.€Atkins€hadÐ ä4 Ðplayed€an€active€role€in€the€crimes€against€Ms.€Gibson.€€However,€they€were€never€able€to€prove€thatÐ Ð  Ðthe€State€declined€to€prosecute€her€in€exchange€for€her€testimony€against€the€Defendant.€€The€basicÐ ¼  Ðtheory€of€defense€was€to€force€the€State€to€meet€its€burden€of€proof:€€that€the€Defendant€was€presentÐ ¨ø Ðat€the€scene€and€participated€in€the€crimes.€€As€a€corollary,€the€Defendantððs€lawyers€intended€toÐ ”ä Ðattack€Ms.€Adkinsðð€credibility€and€demonstrate€that€she€was€the€actual€killer.Ð €Ð ÐÌà  àMr.€Shirley€acknowledged€that€his€fee€request€reflected€that€he€had€spent€a€total€of€33.6€hoursÐ X ¨ Ðpreparing€for€trial.€€He€stated,€however,€that€his€fee€requests€frequently€did€not€reflect€all€timeÐ D!” Ðactually€spent€preparing€for€a€case.€€When€queried€about€his€opinion€of€the€defenseððs€performance,Ð 0"€  ÐMr.€Shirley€stated€that€the€only€thing€he€would€have€done€differently€would€have€been€to€call€aÐ #l! Ðparticular€witness€that€they€had€tried,€unsuccessfully,€to€find.€€This€witness,€Barbara€Slusher,€wouldÐ $X" Ðsupposedly€have€testified€that€Ms.€Adkins€had€told€her€that€she€had€participated€in€killing€the€victim.€Ð ô$D # ÐMr.€Shirley€stated€further,€however,€that€he€did€not€think€Ms.€Slusherððs€testimony€would€haveÐ à%0!$ Ðresulted€in€the€Defendantððs€acquittal.€€Ð Ì&"% ÐÌà  àGlen€Rutherford€also€testified.€€His€fee€request€reflected€that€he€had€spent€forty„five€hoursÐ ¤(ô#' Ðin€trial€preparation.€€Like€Mr.€Shirley,€the€only€thing€he€would€have€done€differently€at€trial€wouldÐ )à$( Ðâ âhave€been€to€call€Ms.€Slusher,€had€she€been€available.€€Mr.€Rutherford€admitted€that€he€hadÐ |*Ì%) Ðacknowledged€the€Defendantððs€presence€at€the€crime€scene€during€opening€statements.׃×Ý ƒ+#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€He€alsoÐ ° Ðâ âstated,€however,€that€the€Defendant€had€told€them€that€he€had€been€there.Ð œì ÐÌà  àIn€response€to€the€Defendantððs€allegations€that€his€lawyers€had€not€prepared€adequately€forÐ tÄ Ðhis€trial,€and€further,€that€they€threw€away€his€defense€by€acknowledging€in€opening€statement€hisÐ `° Ðpresence€at€the€scene€of€the€crime,€the€trial€court€found€as€follows:Ð L œ ÐÌà8  àà ` à[The€Defendant]€also€claims€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€on€behalf€of€hisÐ $ t Ðtwo€trial€counsel.€€While€the€[Defendant]€did€not€testify€as€to€any€specificÐ  ` Ðshortcomings,€his€post„conviction€counsel€did€vigorously€cross„examine€them€duringÐ ü L  Ðthe€hearing.€€[The€Defendant]€complains€that€trial€counselððs€efforts€to€implicateÐ è 8  ÐDiana€Adkins,€the€stateððs€eyewitness,€as€the€true€culprit€was€misplaced.€€They€claimÐ Ô$  Ðthat€defense€counsel€should€have€taken€a€different€trial€tactic,€specifically€that€Mr.Ð À  ÐCaldwell€was€not€present€at€the€crime€scene.€€[The€Defendant]€was€adamant€that€theÐ ¬ü  Ðonly€evidence€of€his€presence€at€the€scene€was€the€testimony€of€Diana€Adkins€andÐ ˜è  Ðtrial€counselððs€opening€statement€indicating€he€was€present.€€A€review€of€theÐ „Ô  Ðtestimony€at€trial,€however,€also€establishes€that€John€Adkins€testified€as€to€anÐ pÀ Ðadmission€made€to€him€by€the€[Defendant]€that€not€only€was€the€[Defendant]€present,Ð \¬ Ðbut€was€responsible€for€the€death€of€Ms.€Gibson.€€In€addition,€a€review€of€the€recordÐ H˜ Ðsupplies€overwhelming€circumstantial€evidence€that€puts€Mr.€Caldwell€at€or€near€theÐ 4„ Ðscene€of€this€crime€at€pertinent€times.€€Further,€Mr.€Caldwell€had€acknowledged€toÐ  p Ðhis€trial€counsel€that€he€was€present€at€the€scene,€[and]€attempts€by€them€to€[elicit]Ð  \ Ðtestimony€to€the€contrary€would€have€been€unethical€and€inappropriate.ÐøHÐ Ð  Ðà  àà ` à.€.€.€Ð ä4 Ðà8  àà ` àTrial€counsel€testified€that€their€approach€to€this€case€was€to€establish€thatÐ Ð  ÐDiana€Adkins€was€the€truly€responsible€party€for€the€death€of€Ms.€Gibson.€€It€isÐ ¼  Ðunquestioned€that€they€vigorously€cross„examined€her€and€established€inconsistenciesÐ ¨ø Ðin€her€prior€statements.€€Indeed,€the€jury€returned€a€note€during€deliberation€askingÐ ”ä Ðif€they€could€also€find€Ms.€Adkins€guilty€of€some€transgression.ЀÐÐ Ð  Ðà8  àà ` àThis€court€is€of€the€opinion€that€trial€counsel€in€this€case€adequately€preparedÐ l¼ Ðand€presented€a€defense€on€behalf€of€Mr.€Caldwell.€€We€do€not€judge€trial€counselððsÐ X ¨ Ðaction€in€the€cool€reflection€of€20/20€hindsight,€but€rather€determine€whether€trialÐ D!” Ðcounsel€is€performing€in€an€effective€manner€to€the€extent€that€one€can€rely€on€theÐ 0"€  Ðoutcome€of€the€proceeding.€€In€applying€the€standards€of€òòStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,Ð #l! Ð466€U.S.€668€(1984),€and€òòBaxter€v.€Roseóó,€523€S.W.2d€930€(Tenn.€1975),€this€courtÐ $X" Ðis€of€the€opinion€that€trial€counsel€did€perform€within€the€standards€set€forth€in€thoseÐ ô$D # Ðdecisions€and€their€progeny.€€For€the€foregoing€reasons,€this€court€finds€this€petitionÐ à%0!$ Ðto€be€without€merit€and€DENIES€post„conviction€relief.ÐÌ&"%Ð Ð  ÐÐ ¸'#& ÐÔ#†¼Á»XXK5‘ #ÔÔ€XK5X»¼ÁÔIn€this€appeal,€the€Defendant€contends€that€the€trial€court€erred€in€denying€post„conviction€relief,Ð ° Ðarguing€that€the€proof€demonstrated€that€his€lawyersðð€trial€preparation€was€inadequate;€that€they€hadÐ œì Ðno€clear€defense€strategy;€and€that€counselððs€reference€in€opening€statements€to€the€DefendantððsÐ ˆØ Ðpresence€at€the€scene€was€ð ðdeficient€performance€per€se.ðð€Ð tÄ ÐÔ‡XK5XXXK5ÔÌà  àBoth€the€Sixth€Amendment€to€the€United€States€Constitution€and€Article€I,€Section€9€of€theÐ L œ ÐTennessee€Constitution€guarantee€a€criminal€defendant€the€right€to€representation€by€counsel.€€òòSeeóóÐ 8 ˆ ÐòòState€v.€Burnsóó,€6€S.W.3d€453,€461€(Tenn.€1999);€òòBaxter€v.€Roseóó,€523€S.W.2d€930,€936€(Tenn.€1975).€Ð $ t ÐBoth€the€United€States€Supreme€Court€and€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€have€recognized€that€theÐ  ` Ðright€to€such€representation€includes€the€right€to€ð ðreasonably€effectiveðð€assistance,€that€is,€within€theÐ ü L  Ðrange€of€competence€demanded€of€attorneys€in€criminal€cases.€€òòSeeóó€òòStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466Ð è 8  ÐU.S.€668,€687€(1984);€òòBurnsóó,€6€S.W.3d€at€461;€òòBaxteróó,€523€S.W.2d€at€936.Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àA€lawyerððs€assistance€to€his€or€her€client€is€ineffective€if€the€lawyerððs€conduct€ð ðsoÐ ¬ü  Ðundermined€the€proper€functioning€of€the€adversarial€process€that€the€trial€cannot€be€relied€on€asÐ ˜è  Ðhaving€produced€a€just€result.ðð€€òòStricklandóó,€466€U.S.€at€686.€€This€overall€standard€is€comprised€ofÐ „Ô  Ðtwo€components:€deficient€performance€by€the€defendantððs€lawyer,€and€actual€prejudice€to€theÐ pÀ Ðdefense€caused€by€the€deficient€performance.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€at€687;€òòBurnsóó,€6€S.W.3d€at€461.€€The€DefendantÐ \¬ Ðin€this€case€bears€the€burden€of€establishing€both€of€these€components€by€a€preponderance€of€theÐ H˜ Ðevidence.€€òòSeeóó€òòMcGee€v.€Stateóó,€739€S.W.2d€789,€790€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).׃×Ý ƒ+#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×òòóó€€The€defendantððsÐ 4„ Ðfailure€to€prove€either€deficiency€or€prejudice€is€a€sufficient€basis€upon€which€to€deny€relief€on€anÐ  p Ðineffective€assistance€of€counsel€claim.€€òòSeeóó€òòBurnsóó,€6€S.W.3d€at€461;€òòGoad€v.€Stateóó,€938€S.W.2d€363,Ð  \ Ð370€(Tenn.€1996).Ð øH ÐÌà  àIn€evaluating€a€lawyerððs€performance,€the€reviewing€court€uses€an€objective€standard€ofÐ Ð  Ðð ðreasonableness.ðð€€òòSeeóó€òòStricklandóó,€466€U.S.€at€688;€òòBurnsóó,€6€S.W.3d€at€462òòóó.€€The€reviewing€courtÐ ¼  Ðmust€be€highly€deferential€to€counselððs€choices€ð ðand€should€indulge€a€strong€presumption€thatÐ ¨ø Ðcounselððs€conduct€falls€within€the€wide€range€of€reasonable€professional€assistance.ðð€€òòBurnsóó,€6Ð ”ä ÐS.W.3d€at€462;€òòsee€alsoóó€òòStricklandóó,€466€U.S.€at€689.€€The€court€should€not€use€the€benefit€ofÐ €Ð Ðhindsight€to€second„guess€trial€strategy€or€to€criticize€counselððs€tactics,€òòseeóó€òòHellard€v.€Stateóó,€629Ð l¼ ÐS.W.2d€4,€9€(Tenn.€1982),€and€counselððs€alleged€errors€should€be€judged€in€light€of€all€the€facts€andÐ X ¨ Ðcircumstances€as€of€the€time€they€were€made,€òòseeóó€òòStricklandóó,€466€U.S.€at€690;€òòHicks€v.€Stateóó,€983Ð D!” ÐS.W.2d€240,€246€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1998).Ð 0"€  ÐÌà  àA€trial€courtððs€determination€of€an€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€claim€presents€a€mixedÐ $X" Ðquestion€of€law€and€fact€on€appeal.€€òòSeeóó€òòFields€v.€Stateóó,€40€S.W.3d€450,€458€(Tenn.€2001).€€ThisÐ ô$D # ÐCourt€reviews€the€trial€courtððs€findings€of€fact€with€regard€to€the€effectiveness€of€counsel€under€a€òòdeóóÐ à%0!$ Ðòònovoóó€standard,€accompanied€with€a€presumption€that€those€findings€are€correct€unless€theÐ Ì&"% Ðpreponderance€of€the€evidence€is€otherwise.€€òòSeeóó€òòid.óó€€ð ðHowever,€a€trial€courtððs€òòconclusions€of€lawóó„„Ð ¸'#& Ðsuch€as€whether€counselððs€performance€was€deficient€or€whether€that€deficiency€was€prejudicial„„areÐ ° Ðreviewed€under€a€purely€òòdeóó€òònovoóó€standard,€with€no€presumption€of€correctness€given€to€the€trialÐ œì Ðcourtððs€conclusions.ðð€€òòId.óó€€Ô#†XK5XXXK550#Ô€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àThis€case€boiled€down€to€whether€the€jury€believed€the€Stateððs€eyewitness€to€the€murder,Ð `° ÐDiana€Atkins.€€The€Defendant€does€not€contend€that€his€lawyers€were€ineffective€in€their€attacks€onÐ L œ Ðher€credibility.€€Rather,€his€chief€complaint€is€that€they€bolstered€her€testimony€by€admitting€duringÐ 8 ˆ Ðopening€statement€that€he€was€present€at€the€crime€scene.€€We€agree€that,€where€the€theory€of€defenseÐ $ t Ðis€to€force€the€State€to€carry€its€burden€of€proof,€any€admission€of€facts€supporting€an€element€of€theÐ  ` Ðcrime€during€a€defendantððs€opening€statement€may€be€unwise€and€potentially€deficientÐ ü L  Ðrepresentation.€€However,€it€is€clear€in€this€case€that€the€jury€accredited€Ms.€Atkinsðð€testimony€thatÐ è 8  Ðthe€Defendant€participated€in€killing€the€victim,€thereby€implicitly€finding€that€the€Defendant€wasÐ Ô$  Ðpresent€at€the€scene.€€We€have€no€difficulty€concluding€that€the€jury€would€have€reached€this€sameÐ À  Ðresult€even€if€defense€counsel€had€said€nothing€during€opening€statement€other€than,€ð ðYou€shouldÐ ¬ü  Ðnot€believe€a€word€the€Stateððs€witnesses€say.ðð€€Ms.€Atkinsðð€testimony€was€corroborated€by€otherÐ ˜è  Ðevidence,€and€the€Defendant€had€no€alibi.€€In€short,€while€the€Defendantððs€lawyer€should€not€haveÐ „Ô  Ðadmitted€during€opening€statement€the€Defendantððs€presence€at€the€scene€of€the€crime,€the€DefendantÐ pÀ Ðhas€failed€to€demonstrate€that€he€was€prejudiced€thereby.€€Accordingly,€his€claim€of€ineffectiveÐ \¬ Ðassistance€of€counsel€on€this€ground€is€without€merit.Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àWith€respect€to€trial€preparation,€the€Defendant€has€offered€no€proof€of€how€any€additionalÐ  p Ðtime€and/or€investigation€and/or€meetings€with€the€Defendant€would€have€altered€the€verdict€in€hisÐ  \ Ðfavor.€€At€the€post„conviction€hearing,€the€Defendant€put€on€no€additional€witnesses€that€should€haveÐ øH Ðbeen€called€at€trial,€but€were€not,€nor€did€he€produce€any€physical€evidence€that€his€lawyers€shouldÐ ä4 Ðhave€introduced€at€trial,€but€did€not.€€The€Defendant€basically€contends€that€we€should€view€hisÐ Ð  Ðlawyersðð€trial€preparation€as€inadequate€based€simply€on€the€number€of€hours€they€spent.€€We€declineÐ ¼  Ðto€adopt,€however,€such€a€formulaic€approach€to€determining€the€effectiveness€of€legalÐ ¨ø Ðrepresentation.Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àSimilarly,€we€reject€the€Defendantððs€contention€that€his€lawyers€were€ineffective€because€theyÐ l¼ Ðlacked€a€ð ðclear€defense€strategy.ðð€€In€some€criminal€cases,€especially€where€the€defendant€hasÐ X ¨ Ðadmitted€to€his€lawyers€his€presence€at€the€scene,€the€only€strategy€available€is€ð ðthe€State€cannotÐ D!” Ðprove€its€case€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.ðð€€That€was€the€strategy€adopted€in€this€case€and€defenseÐ 0"€  Ðcounsel€were€so€effective€in€impeaching€Ms.€Adkins€that€the€jury€wanted€to€convict€her€of€someÐ #l! Ðoffense:€€in€spite€of€the€fact€that€she€had€never€been€charged€with€anything.€€The€Defendant€has€failedÐ $X" Ðto€demonstrate€what€else€his€lawyers€should€have€done€to€attack€the€Stateððs€case,€and€has€thereforeÐ ô$D # Ðfailed€to€establish€that€he€was€prejudiced€by€his€lawyersðð€performance.Ð à%0!$ ÐÌà  àWe€agree€with€the€trial€court€that€the€Defendant€has€failed€to€prove€that€he€received€theÐ ¸'#& Ðineffective€assistance€of€counsel€at€trial.€€Accordingly,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.€€€Ð ¤(ô#' Ѐ€ÌÌÐ h+¸&* ЇÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð tÄ Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àDAVID€H.€WELLES,€JUDGE