WPC-  %Vw@\ 0 U:x 4  0   0D 0JA 0T 0^ 0h= 0r 0| 0 0 1u 0d BU*B)DC AM5( D3,_ 0@d o!2"v~$vz& AOM,, 0Db- D/- B-X DGeUUDӀ(`$TR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T7GXXdXXd7  ,cAZ"Arial Regular;$3|x((3$ `!TR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T7XXdd7    `   0  (#$  0  2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23    ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X d<  9p`(Arial% Line 7 d%%%%7Border 1dd-&C << G  !  #d##    ! \RA'\#d#   #   YYY FILED#XJuly2,1998CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerk    !#d##     \RA'\#d#   #\RA'\7XXdd7     Theappellantsmultipleconvictionsstemfromhisunlawfulsexualpenetrationandsexualcontactofhisthreedaughters,ages10,12and14.Theconvictionsincludetwocountsofsexualbattery,fourcountsofaggravatedsexualbattery,twocountsofrapeandfourteencountsofaggravatedrape.'dxd  !#d##     \RA'\#d#   #       TerryMcConnellwaspermittedtowithdrawascounselpriortotrial.  !#d##     \RA'\#d#   #       Atthehearing,postconvictioncounseladvisedthecourtthathehadattemptedtolocatethetwowitnessesbuttheycouldnotbefound.("$     Z !#d##     \RA'\#d#   #       TheappellantspetitionwasfiledinApril1995.Accordingly,theappellantsburdenofproofwasbya preponderanceoftheevidenceasthe1995PostConvictionProcedureActbecameeffectiveMay10,1995.Tenn.CodeAnn.4030105(repealed1995).  !#d##     \RA'\#d#   #       Weacknowledgedthattheappellantschallengetothevoluntarinessofhisstatementonappealwaspredicateduponthecoercivenatureofthepolice.Nevertheless,theissueremainsoneofvoluntarinesswhichwasdeterminedaftera fullandfairhearing,inbothtrialandappellatecourts.Tenn.CodeAnn.4030112(a).  !#d##     \RA'\#d#   #       Includedwithintheappellantsineffectiveassistanceofcounselclaimaretheadditionalassertionsthat(1)thereasonabledoubtjuryinstructionwasunconstitutional,(2)theindictmentwasfatallydeficient,and(3)theindictmentswerealtered.Theseissuesarealsowaivedbecausetheywerenotdesignatedasissuesorcontainedwithinthestatementoftheissuespresentedforreviewandbecausetheywerenotbriefed.Tenn.R.App.P.27(a)(4),(a)(7).  !#d##     \RA'\#d#   #       Thetrialcourt,atthepostconvictionhearing,foundnomerittothisclaim,concluding: ...theCourtisoftheopinionthatabsolutelynocredibleevidencehasbeenpresentedthatwouldwarrantsuchafinding....IntheCourtsjudgment,petitionersassertionsofmisconductarebasedentirelyonunfoundedspeculation.Weagreewiththisfinding.PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'hStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   ellan Geneva  ellan Geneva -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! . #     \RA'\#Xd##Xd#        R'(&A1-j|`   `@Rߛ @ INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE@ ATNASHVILLE@ MAYSESSION,1998JERRYDWAINECAMMUSE, )     ) No.01C019709CR00440 Appellant   )     ) DAVIDSONCOUNTYvs.     )     ) Hon.J.RandallWyatt,Jr.,JudgeSTATEOFTENNESSEE,  )     ) (POSTCONVICTION) Appellee   ) FortheAppellant:    FortheAppellee: TerryJ.Canady     JohnKnoxWalkup AttorneyforAppellant   AttorneyGeneralandReporter211Printer'sAlleyBldg. Suite400     ElizabethB.Marney Nashville,TN37201   AssistantAttorneyGeneral        CriminalJusticeDivision      450JamesRobertsonParkway      Nashville,TN372430493                VictorS.(Torry)JohnsonIII       DistrictAttorneyGeneral      RosemarySexton       Asst.DistrictAttorneyGeneral      WashingtonSquare,Suite500      2222ndAvenueNorth      Nashville,TN37201OPINIONFILED:򀀀AFFIRMED DavidG.Hayes Judge@ OPINION  Theappellant,JerryDwaineCammuse,appealsthedismissalofhispetitionforpostconvictionreliefbytheDavidsonCountyCriminalCourt.OnNovember30,1990,ajuryfoundtheappellantguiltyoftwentytwofelonies,resultinginaneffectivesentenceof150yearsimprisonment. )   ׀Hisconvictionswereaffirmedondirectappealtothiscourt.SeeStatev.Cammuse,No.01C019107CR00216(Tenn.Crim.App.atNashville,Apr.29,1992),perm.toappealdenied,(Tenn.Sept.14,1992).TheappellantfiledthisprosepetitionforpostconvictionreliefinApril1995.InOctober1995,followingtheappointmentofcounsel,thepetitionwasamended.AnevidentiaryhearinginthiscausewasheldonApril7,1997,andtheappellantspetitionwasdismissedbythetrialcourtonMay6,1997.Theappellantappealsthisdismissalallegingaserror(1)thathewasdeniedtheeffectiveassistanceofcounseland(2)prosecutorialmisconduct.̛̜ @ Analysis A.IneffectiveAssistanceofCounsel Whenaclaimofineffectiveassistanceofcounselisraised,theappellantbearstheburdenofshowingthat(a)theservicesrenderedbytrialcounselweredeficientand(b)thedeficientperformancewasprejudicial.Stricklandv.Washington,466U.S.668,687,104S.Ct.2052,2064(1984);Cooperv.State,849S.W.2d744,746(Tenn.1993).Withrespecttodeficientperformance,thecourtmustdecidewhetherornotcounselsperformancewaswithintherangeofcompetencedemandedofattorneysincriminalcases.Baxterv.Rose,523S.W.2d930,936(Tenn.1975).TosatisfytheprejudiceprongoftheStricklandtest,theappellantmustshowareasonableprobabilitythat,butforcounselsineffectiveperformance,theresultoftheproceedingwouldhavebeendifferent.Strickland,466U.S.at694,104S.Ct.at2068.Onappellatereview,thelowercourtsfindingsareconclusiveabsentafindingthatevidencepreponderatesagainstthejudgment.Clennyv.State,576S.W.2d12,14(Tenn.Crim.App.1978),cert.denied,441U.S.947,99S.Ct.2170(1979).̛ Theappellantallegesthathereceivedtheineffectiveassistanceofcounselbothattrialandonappeal.First,hecontendsthathisoriginalappointedattorney,TerryMcConnell, +   ׀afterfilingamotiontosuppress,failedtocalltwowitnessesatthehearingwhowouldhavetestifiedthat, Mr.Cammusehadconsumedalcoholalldayandworkedallnightwithonlyacouplehourssleepandwasinno mentalstatetogiveastatementtothepolice.Thisargumentfailsfortworeasons.Thereisnoproofinthisrecordthattwowitnessesexistedwhowouldhavesupportedthisallegation. ,   כSeeBlackv.State,794S.W.2d752,757(Tenn.Crim.App.1990).Bareallegationsareinsufficienttosupportproofoftheclaim.Thepetitionerinapostconvictionproceedingbearstheburdenofproving,byapreponderanceoftheevidence,theallegationinhispetition.Davisv.State,912S.W.2d689,697(Tenn.1995). .   ׀Theappellanthasfailedtomeetthisburden.Moreover,theissueofthevoluntarinessoftheappellantsstatementtothepolicehasbeenpreviouslydetermined.Issuesthathavebeenpreviouslydeterminedondirectappealcannotsupportapetitionforpostconvictionreliefandare,therefore,excluded.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4030111,112(a)(1990)(repealed1995);Statev.Denton,938S.W.2d373,377(Tenn.1996).Ondirectappeal,theappellantarguedthathisstatementtothepolicewasinvoluntary.Cammuse,No.01C019107CR00216.Thiscourt,onappeal,accreditedthefindingsofthetrialcourtconcludingthat, theappellantsstatementwasvoluntary,theappellantwasrationalandcoherentinhisresponsesandtheappellantsemotionalstatedidnotrenderthestatementinvoluntary. /   ׀Accordingly,thisissueiswithoutmerit. Second,theappellantcontendsthatsubstitutedappointedcounsel,MichaelEngle,wasineffectivefor(1)failingtoobjecttohearsaytestimonyattrial,(2) allow[ing]perjuredtestimonyduringthetrial,(3)refusingtoaskquestionswhichwouldhaveacquittedtheappellant,(4)failingtohave anunexplainednoiseonthe allegedconfessiontapeanalyzed,and(5) fail[ing]toprovetothejurythattherewasanongoingcustodybattlebetweentheappellantandhisexwife.Initially,wenotethatnowhereistherefoundwithintheargumentportionoftheappellantsbriefanyreferencetothedeficientperformanceoftrialcounselEngle.Accordingly,theseissuesarewaivedbecausetheyarenotsupportedbyargumentorcitationtoauthority.Tenn.Ct.Crim.R.App.10(b);Tenn.R.App.P.27(a)7;Harveyv.State,749S.W.2d478,479(Tenn.Crim.App.1987),perm.toappealdenied,(Tenn.1988). Notwithstandingthisproceduraldefault,theproofbeforeussupportsthedetailedfindingsofthetrialcourt,concludingthisissueiswithoutmerit:8 SeniorAssistantPublicDefenderEngleisahighlyexperiencedandcompetentcriminaldefenseattorneywhorepresentedpetitionerinathoroughanddiligentmanner.Insupportthereof,theCourtpointstothefollowing:counselmadenumerouscontactswithhisclientinpreparationfortrial;counselinvestigatedallallegationsofabuse;counselinterviewedseveralwitnessesinpreparationfortrial,andalsoreviewedawealthofinformationprovidedbythepetitioner;counselconferredwithpriorcounsel,AttorneyJayNorman,andtothateffect,reviewedrecordsofthejuvenilecourtproceedingsconcerningallegedabusebythepetitionerofhisdaughters;counselsubmittedalengthyanddetailedMotiontoReconsiderthetrialcourtsdenialofthemotiontosuppressthestatementstopolice;counselsubmittedmotionschallengingthesufficiencyofmultiplecountsoftheindictment,twoofwhichthetrialcourtdismissed,and,intheprocess,challengedthedisappearanceofDepartmentofHumanServicesrecordswhichcontainedinformationofpastinvestigationsofthepetitioner;counselconferredwithhisclientduringthetrialanddiscussedthewitnesslist;counselreviewedproposedquestionssubmittedbypetitionertobeaskedincourt;counselcalledwitnessestotestifyforthepetitioner;counselconferredwithpetitionerabouttestifyingpriortopetitionerdecidingtotakethestand;counselexplainedtheresultofthetrialtopetitionerandalsospokewithpetitionersfamilyabouttheoutcome;counsel,atthesentencinghearing,opposedtheapplicationofcertainaggravatingfactorsandsubmittedmitigatingfactorsforthecourtsconsideration;counselfiledaMotionforaNewTrialraisingallpertinentobjections;andcounselassistedintheframingofissuesforappeal.Finally,accordingtoCounselEngle,atnotimedidpetitionercomplainabouttherepresentationhewasreceiving.Theproofpreponderatesinfavorofthesefindings. Finally,theappellantallegesdeficientperformanceofappellatecounsel,JeffDeVasher,onappeal.Again,wefinditunnecessarytoaddressthemeritsofthisissueastheissueisnotsupportedbyargument.Tenn.Ct.Crim.R.App.10(b);Tenn.R.App.P.27(a)(7). 0   כThisissueiswaived.B.ProsecutorialMisconduct Next,theappellantcontendsthattheassistantdistrictattorneycommittedprosecutorialmisconductby usingknownperjuredtestimonyandby deliberatedestructionofallexculpatorymaterialinthismatter. 1   ׀Theappellantbasesthiscontentionontheclaimthatthedetectivewhoarrestedtheappellantgave threedifferentstatementsattwodifferenthearings,and,therefore,allthosestatementscannotbetrue.Moreover,theappellantcontendsthattheStateagaincommittedmisconductwhenitclaimeditdidnothavecertainrecordsfromtheDepartmentofHumanServicesdetailingseveralinterviewswiththeappellantsthreedaughters,thevictimsinthiscase.Thisissuehasbeenwaivedbecauseitcouldhavebeenraisedondirectappeal.Tenn.CodeAnn.4030111,112(repealed1995). [W]henapetitionforpostconvictionreliefdoesnotallegefactsshowingthatthegroundsassertedforreliefwerenotwaivedinapriorproceedinginwhichtheycouldhavebeenpresented,thepetitiondoesnotpresentacolorableclaimforreliefandissubjecttodismissal.Statev.Smith,814S.W.2d45,47(Tenn.1991);seealsoTenn.CodeAnn.4030112(b)(1).Thisissueiswithoutmerit. Fortheforegoingreasons,thejudgmentofthetrialcourtdismissingtheappellantspetitionforpostconvictionreliefisaffirmed.     ____________________________________     DAVIDG.HAYES,JudgeCONCUR:___________________________________GARYR.WADE,PresidingJudge___________________________________JERRYL.SMITH,Judge