WPC [4﫾l.Y>kM50of.[om ÄKwT&*>,"n{=F/a[ ? RZ9( ߪHjU;݁X}jhc)KIF?B䒕e|K_H8St_3:qe _/+E6Cj`oݻ)WɘH"O yJZ{`WqB<9M_c3/ҧ7Ƈo5_>LOj;&&Ot0(fVH$7` ZnIp iV_$̝,=h$#9`4{B-ئeƣ*nm.u#\uܪl40w7!ڏ0TOYS\U̻IP} 0=Vv$x]_Y9Pv,Z*Pkb %\^ b 0nU NwD4H\ zk m U@ #   e+NUN WE__ 0Da( 00b 0Y ^ p ^ 0Npppppppppppp 0 B 0 D5j D- 0K ASj 00 0D A"xU/ (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regularlk.:i+003|x C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptU(9 Z(Times New Roman HP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL6V,,,,V0Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5   (9 Z6Times New Roman Regular (#$  0  0.Normal- -64Hyperlink    LPHit2LPHit3/mb/lpext.dll?f=FifLink&t=document-frame.htm&l=jump&iid=17088a&d=553%20s.w.2d%20337&sid=255706d0.5c4e5948.0.0LPHit4(O$(|G2$ !.8idd8         0  Ռ d(|3$ !.8idd8     VVVV)!dxdx)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3$ !.8idd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8idd8     _  i8XXdd8  *4i/e@hh*4INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @gg$ATNASHVILLE#*4<#Ԉ    AssignedonBriefsAugust13,2003 > X>X*4 #*4XX>8#BOBBYJOECARTERv.STATEOFTENNESSEEX>X*4  0  Direct @@ AppealfromtheCircuitCourtforMarshallCounty  " @@No.15109CharlesLee,Judge   @@*AV) ` dE<i` A j  @@TTNo.M200202802CCAR3PCFiledOctober17,_2003_ _  AV) ` dE<*` A +{     Theappellant,servinganeffectivetwentyyearsentenceonthreecountsofespeciallyaggravated  p  #cddd_kidnapping_,arguesthetrialcourterredindenyinghispetitionforpostconvictionreliefbecause:(1) V #ddcdhisguiltypleawasnotenteredvoluntarilyandintelligently;and(2)histrialcounselwasineffective. < Weaffirmthejudgmentofthepostconvictioncourt. "  Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheCircuitCourt Affirmed     #*4X>#X>X.*4#cdddJerryL.Smith,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichGaryR.Wade,_P.J._,andDavidG. j #ddcdHayes,J.,joined. P    `     h      p   LarryF.Wallace,Jr.,_Shelbyville_,Tennessee,fortheappellant,BobbyJoeCarter. l PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneralandReporter;ThomasE.Williams,III,AssistantAttorney 8 General;WilliamMichael_McCown_,DistrictAttorneyGeneral;and_Weakley_ԀE.Barnard,Assistant  DistrictAttorneyGeneral,fortheappellee,StateofTennessee.  ` OPINION        InOctober2000,theappellantbrokeintothehomeofhisexwifeafterseveringher L"" telephoneline.Usingasword,heforcedherandtheirtwochildrenintoacaranddrovethemtoan 2## abandonedtrailer,wherehecoercedhisformerwifetohavesexualrelations.Hethenreturnedhis $h$ exwifetoherhome,butkeptthechildren.Hewassubsequentlyarrested. $N % #cddd  Pursuanttoapleaagreement,theappellantpledguiltytothreecountsofespeciallyaggravated &"' #ddcd_kidnapping_Ԁandreceivedthreeconcurrenttwentyyearsentences.Theappellantsubsequentlysought '#( postconvictionrelief.Duringthepostconvictionreliefhearing,heallegedhewastakinganumber (#) ofpsychiatricmedicationswhichaffectedhisabilitytoentertheplea.Healsoclaimedhistrial |)$* counselwasineffective.Inthisappeal,hecontendsthepostconvictioncourterredinconcluding b*%+ hevoluntarilyandintelligentlyenteredhisguiltypleaanderredinfindingtrialcounselprovided H+&, effectiverepresentation. .,~'-    `     -J)/ _@  PROOFATPOSTCONVICTIONHEARING     Atthepostconvictionhearing,theappellanttestifiedhewastakingfourorfivedifferent | medications,includingThorazine,atthetimeofhisguiltyplea.Heindicatedthemedications b affectedhismentalabilitiesanddescribedhimselfasa Zombie.Hestatedtherewas noway H hewouldhavepledguiltyifhehadnotbeenmedicated.Herememberedthetrialcourtaskinghim . ~ questions,andthatheresponded, Yes,becausehistrialcounselinstructedhimtodoso.  d   #*4XX>#X>X*4Theappellantsaidthatonthedayofhispleahearing,heknewhewasenteringthecourtroom  0 topleadguilty,andthatheandhisattorneyhaddiscussedit.Hetestifiedheknewhewouldbe    receivingatwentyyearsentence.Hestatedheagreedtothepleabecausehistrialcounselindicated    hewouldnotbesuccessfulifthecasewenttotrial.Hesaidnoonewouldlistentohisversionof   theevents,andhe didntfeel[he]wasrepresented[as]stronglyas[he]couldhavebeenorshould x  havebeen.Heinitiallytestifiedhismainconcernwasthathedidnothaveadequateopportunities ^  tospeakwithhisattorney.Heconceded,however,hedidnotknowifmoretimewithhisattorney D  wouldhavechangedtheoutcomeofhiscaseanddidnotknowofanythingelsehecouldhavetold *z  hisattorneyifshehadspentmoretimewithhim.Hethenopinedtrialcounselwasineffective `  [b]ecauseallshewantedtodowasplead,cutadeal. F   #*4XX>#X>X*4TheDistrictPublicDefendertestifiedatthepostconvictionhearingthatshemetwiththe  appellantapproximatelytwentytimesandspentaroundfifteenhoursconferringwithhim.Shesaid  othermembersofherstaffalsometwiththeappellant.Sheestimatedherofficespentoverone  hundredhoursworkingontheappellantscase.Shetestifiedsherevieweddiscovery,spokewith t theappellantsexwifenumeroustimes,intervieweddoctors,obtainedmedicalrecords,and Z researchedtheappellantsmedications. @   Sheopinedshewasabsolutelysatisfiedthatshewasthoroughlypreparedwhensheadvised  \ theappellantregardinghisplea.Shestatedsheadvisedtheappellantthatshe didnotfeelthathe B hadaverygoodchanceattrial,andheriskedreceivingagreatersentenceifhewereconvictedat ( trial.Sheindicatedthatthepleaagreementshenegotiated,whichprovidedfordismissalofmost  ofthechargesagainsttheappellantaswellasaneffectivetwentyyearsentence,wasthebest  possibleoutcomefortheappellant.   #cddd  Theproofestablishedtheappellantremainedincarceratedinthecountyjailwhilehiscasewas V"! #ddcdpending.Trialcounseltestifiedtheappellantwastakingseveralmedications.Shehadtheappellant <#" evaluated,andthementalhealthexpertopinedtheappellantwascompetenttostandtrialandthe "$r# appellantdidnotsufferfromadiminishedcapacity. %X $   Sherecalledtheappellantspleahearingwascontinuedtogivetheappellantmoretimeto &$"& decidewhetherhewantedtoacceptthepleaoffer.Sheindicatedtheappellantbelievedhisformer ' #' wifewoulddropthecharges,andthatwhenherealizedthevictimwasnotgoingtochangehermind, (#( hedecidedtopleadguilty.#*4XX>l#X>X*4Shesaidshereadthepleapetitiontohim;heunderstoodhisplea;he )$) knewthattwentyyearswasthebestpossiblesentencehecouldreceive;andhemadeaninformed l*%* decisiontopleadguilty. R+&+  8,',   AnAssistantDistrictPublicDefendercorroboratedtheDistrictPublicDefender#*4XX>6!#X>X*4stestimony.  Heindicatedtheirofficewascarefultoobserveincarceratedclientsforsignsofimpairmentdueto  medication.Aninvestigatortestifiedhealsometwiththeappellant.Hestatedtheappellantwas | awareoftheallegationsagainsthimandwasabletocommunicatewithhimabouthiscase.Hesaid b therewasnoindicationtheappellantdidnotunderstandhissituation. H   ThepostconvictioncourtaccreditedthetestimonyoftheDistrictPublicDefenderandher  d assistantthattheappellantdidnotappearimpairedonthedayofhisguiltyplea.Itnoteditsown  J practiceofscrutinizingincarcerateddefendantsforimpairmentcausedbyprescriptionmedication  0 andrefusingtoacceptapleaifadefendant appearedintheslightestfashiontobeoverly    medicated.Further,thepostconvictioncourtfoundtheappellantwasnotcoercedintopleading    guilty,andthathistrialcounselprovidedhimwitheffectiveassistance.Accordingly,itdismissed   hispetitionforpostconvictionrelief. x  Ѐ ^  @  POSTCONVICTIONSTANDARDOFREVIEW D    X>XXX>  Thepostconvictionjudgesfindingsoffactonpostconvictionhearingsareconclusiveon ` appealunlesstheevidencepreponderatesotherwise.Statev.Burns,6S.W.3d453,461(Tenn. F 1999).Thosefindingsoffactareaffordedtheweightofajuryverdict,andthiscourtisboundby , thefindingsunlesstheevidenceintherecordpreponderatesagainstthosefindings.Henleyv.State,  960S.W.2d572,578(Tenn.1997);Alleyv.State,958S.W.2d138,147(Tenn.Crim.App.1997).  Thiscourtmaynotreweighorreevaluatetheevidence,norsubstituteitsinferencesforthosedrawn  bythepostconvictioncourt.Statev.Honeycutt,54S.W.3d762,766(Tenn.2001).However,the t postconvictioncourtsconclusionsoflawarereviewedunderapurelydenovostandardwithno Z presumptionofcorrectness.Fieldsv.State,40S.W.3d450,458(Tenn.2001). @ @5 5  I.VOLUNTARYANDINTELLIGENTGUILTYPLEAS   \   Theappellant#X>XX X>n(#contendshispleawasinvoluntaryandunknowing.Oursupremecourthas ( statedthefollowing:  8   ` Thecasesof% B %B. Boykinv.AlabamaandStatev.Mackeyarethelandmark   constitutionalcasesforanalysesofguiltypleas.% C %C.Boykinv.Alabama,395U.S.238, p!  89S.Ct.1709,23L.Ed.2d274(1969)(federalstandard);Statev.Mackey,4D m5  &  S&/  /  6/FO  7 m/553 V"! S.W.2d337(Tenn.1977)(statestandard).In% E %E0Boykin,theUnitedStatesSupreme <#" Courtheldthatbeforeatrialjudgecanacceptaguiltyplea,theremustbean "$r# affirmativeshowingthatitwasgivenintelligentlyandvoluntarily.Id.at242,89S. %X $ Ct.at1711,23L.Ed.2dat279.Inordertofindthatthepleawasentered %>!%  intelligentlyor voluntarily,thecourtmust canvass[]thematterwiththe &$"& accusedtomakesurehehasafullunderstandingofwhatthepleaconnotesandof ' #' itsconsequences.Id.at244,89S.Ct.at1712,23L.Ed.2dat280(emphasis (#( added).&//݌)$)   Ќ  Statev.Pettus,986S.W.2d540,542(Tenn.1999). +H'+ /e    #*4XX>"#X>X*4#*4XX>4#X>X*4  Intheinstantcase,thepostconvictioncourtaccreditedtrialcounselstestimonythatthe  #bdddappellantwasnotimpairedduringhispleahearing,thusfindinghisguiltypleawasenteredknowingly  #ddbdandvoluntarily.Therecordsupportsthepostconvictioncourtsdetermination;therefore,thisissue  iswithoutmerit.   @  II.EFFECTIVEASSISTANCEOFCOUNSEL   C   Theappellantnextcontendstrialcounselwasineffectivefor coercinghimtoenterthe e  guiltyplea.WhenaclaimofineffectiveassistanceofcounselismadeundertheSixthAmendment, K  thepetitionerbearstheburdenofproving(1)thatcounselsperformancewasdeficient,and(2)the 1  deficiencywasprejudicialintermsofrenderingareasonableprobabilitythattheresultofthetrial g  wasunreliableortheproceedingswerefundamentallyunfair.Stricklandv.Washington,466U.S. M  668,687,104S.Ct.2052,2064,80L.Ed.2d674(1984).Thisstandardhasalsobeenappliedto 3 therighttocounselundertheTennesseeConstitution.Statev.Melson,772S.W.2d417,419n.2  (Tenn.1989).Whenapetitionerclaimsineffectiveassistanceofcounselinrelationtoaguiltyplea,  thepetitionermustprovethatcounselperformeddeficiently,and,butforcounselserrors,petitioner  wouldnothavepledguiltybutwouldhave,instead,insistedupongoingtotrial.Hillv.Lockhart, { 474U.S.52,59,106S.Ct.366,370,88L.Ed.2d203(1985). a   Therecordfromthepostconvictionhearingestablishedtrialcounselandherstaffspent # substantialtimeinvestigatingthecaseandmeetingwiththeappellant.Theirtestimonyindicated   theyreviewedthestatesevidence,interviewedwitnesses,investigatedapossibleinsanityor  diminishedcapacitydefense,andwerewellacquaintedwiththefactsandcircumstancesofthe  appellantscasewhenadvisingtheappellantthatthepleaagreementnegotiatedwiththestatewas k thebestpossibledispositionoftheappellantscase. Q   Further,therecordisdevoidofevidencethattheappellantwas coercedtoentertheguilty   plea.Asthepostconvictioncourtaptlystatedinitsfindings,itappearstheappellantmerelyfelt !  hisbackwasagainstthewallduetothestrengthofthestatesproofandrecognizedthathisbest " interestlayinacceptingthepleaoffer.Giventhesefacts,weconcludethepostconvictioncourtdid u# noterrindeterminingtrialcounselsperformanceexceededtheconstitutionalrequirementsfor [$  effectiveassistanceofcounsel. A% !   Accordingly,weaffirmthejudgmentofthepostconvictioncourtdismissingtheappellants '## petitionforpostconvictionrelief. (#$    `     h    }-(( Ї   `     h     ___________________________________ "r    `     h     JERRYL.SMITH,JUDGE