WPCZ' y)i=]yfs27Ng~5^W0c3GJqӏ(q{=ꊵnukfG&hϟ0=e@+T3ł}kߨm@흛a뜝<SˑqB,b=P^$xɆZ# 1QXͶ xsb3.n6]欜._O媸LAI~b %\^ b 0nU=NwD4H\ zk m # U@   e+UNN? 0UA 0Es 0u 04 0 0 0M 0 0 00 0 0 0g 0 0 0J 0 0n 0 0 0y 0# 0 0e 0b 0 0#! 0<! 0-4!U>""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""" 0U"U"U"U" B@#@# 0]# D5$ D-6$ 0Kc$c$ AS$% 0% 0Dk& A&d/ (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regularb.: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.wptU\\IB01S08\KNOXCLERK3,,,,0(9 Z(Times New Roman Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(9 Z6Times New Roman Regular*+ (_2623  ..*D+D (_25   ," <DL,23  ..," <DL,   *5+5 (_24  ) <DL)23  ..) <DL)  *2+2 (_23 ` &<<DL&23  ..&<<DL& ` */+/ (_22  #DL#23  ..#DL#  *,+, (_21   DL 23  .. DL  *)+) (_20 h DDL23  ..DDL h *&+& (_19  L23  ..L  *#+# (_18   L23  .. L  *>> (_17  2( 4 <DL223  Ԁ2( 4 <DL2  *DD (_16   ," <DL,23  Ԁ," <DL,   *55 (_15  ) <DL)23  Ԁ) <DL)  *22 (_14 ` &<<DL&23  Ԁ&<<DL& ` *// (_13  #DL#23  Ԁ#DL#  *,, (_12   DL 23  Ԁ DL  *)) (_11 h DDL23  ԀDDL h *&& (_10  L23  ԀL  (## &_9   L23  Ԁ L  (>> &_8  2( 4 <DL223  2( 4 <DL2  (DD &_7   ," <DL,23  ," <DL,   (55 &_6  ) <DL)23  ) <DL)  (22 &_5 ` &<<DL&23  &<<DL& ` (// &_4  #DL#23  #DL#  (,, &_3   DL 23   DL  ()) &_2 h DDL23  DDL h - -(&& &_1  L23  L  &## $_   L23   L  <:Default Para.,term1 \  `&Times New Roman(|G2<$ !.8dd8         0  - d(|3t$ !.8dd8     VVVV)!dxdx)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3t$ !.8dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8dd8     _   8PXXdd8@tt INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @WW$ATKNOXVILLE# #Ԉ &    @  @` August19,2003Session L XPX #XXP#BOBBYD.CANADAv.STATEOFTENNESSEE XPX J @@ DirectAppealfromtheCriminalCourtforCampbellCounty  J @@No.11078E._Shayne_ԀSexton,Judge  6 @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.E200300804CCAR3PC   December11,_2003_   AV) ` dE<|` A }      XPXXXPThepetitionerwasindictedforfirstdegreemurderandaggravatedarson.Pursuanttoaplea x  agreement,hepledguiltytoseconddegreemurderandsettingfiretopersonalproperty.#XPXX XP##XXP#XPX XPXXXPThe d petitionerfiledforpostconvictionrelief,contendingthathereceivedineffectiveassistanceof P counselandthathisguiltypleawasnotknowingandvoluntary.Thepostconvictioncourtdenied < thepetitionerrelief.Thejudgmentofthepostconvictioncourtisaffirmed.#XPXX XP<##XXP#XPX (x #XXP#XPX Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheCriminalCourtAffirmed  P   #XPK#XPX.JohnEverettWilliams,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichJosephM._Tipton_and ( AlanE.Glenn,JJ.,joined.  RobertS._Asbury_,_Jacksboro_,Tennessee,fortheappellant,BobbyD.Canada.  PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneralandReporter;BrentC.Cherry,AssistantAttorneyGeneral; t WilliamPaulPhillips,DistrictAttorneyGeneral;andMichaelO.Ripley,AssistantDistrictAttorney ` General,fortheappellee,StateofTennessee. L  @@OO& OPINION #XXP #XPX $"t! #XXP( #  XPX XPXXXP  Thepetitioner,BobbyD.Canada,wasindictedforfirstdegreemurderandaggravatedarson. #L# Pursuanttoanagreement,hepledguiltytoseconddegreemurder(ClassAfelony)andsettingfire $8 $ topersonalproperty(ClassEfelony)andagreedtoasentenceoftwentyyearsandfiveyears %$!% respectively,tobeservedconsecutivelyforaneffectivesentenceoftwentyfiveyears.Thepetitioner &"& filedforpostconvictionrelief,contendingthathereceivedineffectiveassistanceofcounselandthat '"' hisguiltypleawasnotknowingandvoluntary.#XPXX XP # XPXXXPԀThepostconvictioncourtdeniedthepetitionerrelief. (#( Henowappealsthedenialofrelief.Thejudgmentofthepostconvictioncourtisaffirmed. )$)  4-(- _  Facts       Atthepleahearing,#XPXX XP# XPXXXPԀtheStateandthepetitionerstipulatedandagreedtothefollowingfactual  account: t 8  ThatinCampbellCounty,Tennessee,onoraboutthe15thofDecemberof1998,that L  the[petitioner],didaidandabetJosephPrewittintheunlawful,felonious,and 8  intentionalkillingofCharlesWayneBryant.$ t   8      8  Furthermore,thatonthesamedateinCampbellCounty,Tennessee,that[petitioner]  L  didaidandabetJosephPrewittintheunlawful,felonious,andknowinglydamaging  8  ofpersonalproperty,anautomobile,byfire,withtheintenttodestroytheproperty $  foranunlawfulpurpose.       Analysis        Thepetitionercontendsonappealthathereceivedineffectiveassistanceofcounsel.This p CourtreviewsaclaimofineffectiveassistanceofcounselunderthestandardsofBaxterv.Rose,523 \ S.W.2d930(Tenn.1975),andStricklandv.Washington,466U.S.668,104S.Ct.2052(1984).The H petitionerhastheburdentoprovethat(1)theattorneysperformancewasdeficient,and(2)the 4 deficientperformanceresultedinprejudicetothedefendantsoastodeprivehimofafairtrial.  p Strickland,466U.S.at687,104S.Ct.at2064;Goadv.State,938S.W.2d363,369(Tenn.1996);  \ Butlerv.State,789S.W.2d898,899(Tenn.1990).Thefailuretoproveeitherdeficiencyor H prejudicejustifiesdenialofrelief;therefore,thecourtneednotaddressthecomponentsinany 4 particularorderorevenaddressboth,ifoneisinsufficient.Goad,938S.W.2dat370.Inorderto   establishprejudice,thepetitionermustestablisha reasonableprobabilitythat,butforcounsels   unprofessionalerrors,theresultoftheproceedingwouldhavebeendifferent.Areasonable  probabilityisaprobabilitysufficienttoundermineconfidenceintheoutcome.Strickland,466U.S.  at694,104S.Ct.at2068.#XPXX XP#XPXXXPWhenapetitionerclaimsineffectiveassistanceofcounselinrelationto  aguiltyplea,thepetitionermustprovethatcounselperformeddeficiently,and,butforcounsels l errors,thepetitionerwouldnothavepledguiltybutwouldhave,instead,insistedupongoingtotrial. X  Hillv.Lockhart,474U.S.52,59,106S.Ct.366,370(1985).#XPXXXP# XPXXXP D!   ThetestinTennesseetodeterminewhethercounselprovidedeffectiveassistanceiswhether #l! hisorherperformancewaswithintherangeofcompetencedemandedofattorneysincriminalcases. $X" Baxter,523S.W.2dat936.Thepetitionermustovercomethepresumptionthatcounselsconduct $D # fallswithinthewiderangeofacceptableprofessionalassistance.Strickland,466U.S.at689,104 %0!$ S.Ct.at2065;Statev.Honeycutt,54S.W.3d762,769(Tenn.2001).Therefore,inordertoprove &"% adeficiency,apetitionermustshow thatcounselsactsoromissionsweresoseriousastofallbelow '#& anobjectivestandardofreasonablenessunderprevailingprofessionalnorms.Goad,938S.W.2d (#' at369(citingStrickland,466U.S.at688,104S.Ct.at2065). )$(   |*%)   Inreviewingcounselsconduct,a fairassessment...requiresthateveryeffortbemadeto   eliminatethedistortingeffectsofhindsight,toreconstructthecircumstancesofcounselschallenged  conduct,andtoevaluatetheconductfromcounselsperspectiveatthetime.Nicholsv.State,90  S.W.3d576,587(Tenn.2002)(citingStrickland,466U.S.at689,104S.Ct.at2065).Thefactthat t aparticularstrategyortacticfailedorhurtthedefensedoesnot,standingalone,establish ` unreasonablerepresentation.However,deferencetomattersofstrategyandtacticalchoicesapplies L  onlyifthechoicesareinformedonesbaseduponadequatepreparation.Henleyv.State,960S.W.2d 8  572,579(Tenn.1997);Hellardv.State,629S.W.2d4,9(Tenn.1982).#XPXX XP# $ t XPXXXP  #XPXXXP$#XPXXXPThepetitionerbearstheburdenofprovingbyclearandconvincingevidencethefactual  L  allegationsthatwouldentitlepetitionertorelief.Tenn.CodeAnn.40-30-210(f).ThisCourtis  8  boundbythepostconvictioncourtsfindingsoffactunlesstheevidencepreponderatesagainstthose $  findings.Fieldsv.State,40S.W.3d450,45657(Tenn.2001).#XPXXXP%#     Thepetitionerfirstarguesthathiscounselwasineffectivebyfailingtopursueamotionthat   wasfiledalleginglackofjurisdictionbecausethemurderoccurredinKentucky.Amotionto   dismissthemurderchargewasfiledbydefensecounselonFebruary4,2000.Apparently,themotion p wasneverruledon.Counselhasfailedtoshowhowhewasprejudicedbythelackofarulingonthe \ motion.Therecordcontainsnoevidencethatthepetitionerwouldhaveprevailedonthemotion. H Infact,itislikelythatthemotionwouldhavebeendenied,andtheStatewouldhavebeenallowed 4 toprovethelocationofthemurderattrial.Counselinformedthepetitionerthatiftheydidnot  p prevailonthejurisdictionissue,hemightbeconvictedoffirstdegreemurderandsentencedtodeath.  \ Thepleaagreementwouldnolongerbeavailableatthatpoint. H   Additionally,thepetitioneragreedtoastipulationatthepleahearingthatthemurder   occurredinTennessee.Aforensicexaminationofthesitewherethepetitionerclaimsthemurder   occurreddidnotrevealanyevidencethatthemurderoccurredinKentucky.Theonlyindicationthat  themurderdidnotoccurinTennesseeisthedenialbythedefendant.Counselmadeatactical  decisionbasedontheslightlikelihoodthattheywouldprevailonthemotionandthepossiblesevere  consequencesiftheydidnot.ThedenialbythepetitionerthatthemurderoccurredinTennesseewill l notsufficeasclearandconvincingevidencethatthepetitionerwasprejudicedbythelackofaruling X  onthemotiontodismiss. D!   Thepetitioneralsoarguesthathiscounselwasdeficientbyfailingtoprocuretheservicesof #l! anindependentforensicexpert.Theforensicexpertreliedonbycounselwasactuallyhiredbythe $X" petitionerscodefendant.Thepetitionerclaimsthatthecodefendantsinterestswereantagonistic $D # tohisinterests.Whilethismaybetrue,hehasfailedtoshowthatthetestsbytheindependent %0!$ forensicexpertwereinanywaydeficient.Thepetitionerhasfailedtoshowthathewasprejudiced &"% bycounselsrelianceonanindependentforensicexpertobtainedbythecodefendant. '#&  X3XPXXXPԀThepetitionernextarguesthathisguiltypleawasnotknowingandvoluntary.Specifically, )$( hearguesthatheisentitledtoreliefbecausecounseldidnotrememberreviewingthepleaformwith |*%) thepetitionerandcounselimpermissiblycoercedthepetitionertopleadguilty.Inorderfora h+&* convictionbaseduponaguilty#XPXX3XP1#2   3XPXXXPplea2a3  ݀tocomportwithdueprocess,the#XPXX3XP3#2   3XPXXXPplea24  ݀mustbevoluntarily,  knowingly,andunderstandinglyentered.Boykinv.Alabama,395U.S.238,24244,89S.Ct.1709,  1712(1969).Aguilty#XPXX3XP;4#2   3XPXXXPplea2n5  ݀isnotvoluntary ifitistheproductofignorance,incomprehension,  coercion,terror,inducements,[or]subtleorblatantthreats....Blankenshipv.State,858S.W.2d t 897,904(Tenn.1993)(quotingBoykin,395U.S.at24243,89S.Ct.at1712).Furthermore,ifan ` accusedisincompetent,thentheguilty#XPXX3XP5#2   3XPXXXPplea27  ݀isinvoluntary.Blankenship,858S.W.2dat904.The L  standardforassessingthevalidityofaguilty#XPXX3XP7#2   3XPXXXPpleais whethertheplea28  ݀representsavoluntaryand 8  intelligentchoiceamongthealternativecoursesofactionopentothedefendant.NorthCarolina $ t v.Alford,400U.S.25,31,91S.Ct.160,164(1970).Toassesswhetheraguilty#XPXX3XP8#2   3XPXXXPplea2`:  ݀wasvoluntary,  ` wemust consideralloftherelevantcircumstancesthatexistedwhenthe#XPXX3XP:#2   3XPXXXPplea2h;  ݀wasentered.State  L  v.Turner,919S.W.2d346,353(Tenn.Crim.App.1995).Thesecircumstancesincludetherelative  8  intelligenceofthedefendant;thedegreeofhisfamiliaritywithcriminalproceedings;whetherhewas $  representedbycompetentcounselandhadtheopportunitytoconferwithcounselabouttheoptions   availabletohim;theextentofadvicefromcounselandthecourtconcerningthechargesagainsthim;   andthereasonsforhisdecisiontopleadguilty,includingadesiretoavoidagreaterpenaltythat   mightresultfromajurytrial.Blankenship,858S.W.2dat904.    X  AstheUnitedStatesSupremeCourthasnoted,apetitionerstestimonyataguilty#XPXX3XP;#2   3XPXXXPplea2X?   \ hearing constitutesaformidablebarrierinanysubsequentcollateralproceedingbecause solemn H declarationsinopencourtcarryastrongpresumptionofverity.Blackledgev.Allison,431U.S. 4 63,73,97S.Ct.1621,1629(1977).ThepleaagreementwasexecutedonJanuary5,2001.The  p postconvictionhearingwasheldonMarch7,2003.Duringthepleahearing,thepetitioneragreed  \ thatcounselhadreviewedthepleaagreementwithhim.#XPXX3XPy?#3XPXXXPԀCounselsfailuretorememberspecifically H reviewingthepleaformwiththepetitionerovertwoyearslaterdoesnotprovebyclearand 4 convincingevidencethatthepetitionerisentitledtorelief.     Duringthepleahearing,thepetitionerstatedthathecouldreadandwrite.Hefurther  indicatedthathehadreadandunderstoodthepleaagreement.Therecordreflectsthatthepetitioner  wasthoroughlyquestionedduringtheentryofhisguilty#XPXX3XPB#2   3XPXXXPple2D  #XPXX3XPD#2   3XPXXXPa2'E  ݀andansweredinafashionthatleftno  questionsastohis#XPXX3XPHE#2   3XPXXXPknowingandvoluntar2 F  #XPXX3XP,F#2   3XPXXXPy2F  ݀act.Theanswersgivenbythepetitionerintheentryof l hisguilty#XPXX3XPF#2   3XPXXXPple2G  #XPXX3XPG#2   3XPXXXPa26H  ݁areincompatiblewithhis#XPXX3XPWH#2   3XPXXXPpostconvictio2H  #XPXX3XPI#2   3XPXXXPn2I  ݀claim.Thepetitionervoluntarilypledguilty X  anddeniedanycoercion.Heacknowledgedthatheunderstoodthetermsofthe#XPXX3XPI#2   3XPXXXPple2J  #XPXX3XPJ#2   3XPXXXPa2BK  ݀bargainand D! desiredtopleadguilty.Thepetitioneralsoexpressedhissatisfactionwithtrialcounsel.#XPXX3XPcK#3XPXXXPThetrial 0"  courtcreditedthepetitionerstestimonyathisguilty#XPXX3XPTL#2   3XPXXXPplea2L  ݀hearingoverhis#XPXX3XPM#2   3XPXXXPpostconviction2M  ݀testimony. #l! Nothingintherecordbeforeusdispelsthereliabilityofthepetitionerstestimonyathisguilty#XPXX3XPM#2   3XPXXXPplea2N   $X" hearing.Thepetitionerhasfailedtoprovebyclearandconvincingevidencethathisguilty#XPXX3XPN#2   3XPXXXPpleas2O   $D # werenotknowingorvoluntary.#XPXX3XPO#3XPXXXP %0!$  h+&*   #XPXX3XP}P# Conclusion       Thepetitionerhasfailedtoprovebyclearandconvincingevidencethathewasprejudiced  byanyallegeddeficienciesorthathisguiltypleawasnotknowingandvoluntary.Basedonthe t foregoingandtherecordasawhole,thejudgmentofthepostconvictioncourtisaffirmed. `    `     h     ___________________________________ $     `     h     JOHNEVERETTWILLIAMS,JUDGE