ÿWPCÈ íRñ%®E|½~*‚¨”S«[À#H‚c"Å~iZ8½'*¾Z5Ù)ã?ƒ™«ètöy®Àv$OD$Àñš'䵄`+ó»¹ÓÆ1¦˜Hí@¡}ý:¢1ó“·Mñ½žTôÒBŠföÅè¼É`{Y}ÅLâæ'‚œqá1óaÛÚqD=$éæ?Ê)öo#‹Æ¨Øcè7®l¤;ðãýÒ°çè•9;«ÎM©QœrnëÀÎñµÉÇÏUÙ‰ 'ôâ¿Ú?Â×QãÃL“äg#§Ú¡Ç3yæ‡G„ À*{Ù¨8aBÝÛÄÁäqË$ÿ´Õ2ܨ»˜“E$ìÞ‘WéxÅYgÙQŽf‹‡þ—Ã]4\ÍA7‹^—&fªY¦è¦xÆJke¬ ô¨öXsšüÆuÌòÀ4üXØM7¤¼3‚ΔºÈÔê0Ä,3Õ€5_º ä¶JU qiKômVJ‹ðð ïÃQ©¸kÈã"îÇH/«â€ˆý/ž²º5µè›é«k­öïoƒyÔœö‘ /_Þ³ ~ $!"±Q 9¬S„qb‡+”œÄªhzsþLÿ<õ{êÈùSÌnô go™ âÈTÙ+fÛÁÜÒQ?!‰7) b#É\ %% ^ + 0ˆ7 UN¿ w 4 z% ÒŸ q € m‚ ™ Æ¡ Æg Æ-ÆóóN¹¹¹E»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»»b½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½½ 0ëÅÅÅÅ B°° 0¤Í D3q D-¤ 0KÑÑ ASÆo 0¤5 0DÙ A«˜\\IB01S08\KNOXCLERK3ÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»N¬/Ï (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regularóbï.ê:i¢×+00 ˜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.wpt3|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5- ù-(|G2C $¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€K-»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôï]ò»»Ô d(|3‡x$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€K-»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3‡x$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€K-»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€K-»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼K-»»»ÔÑ8€YXXdì»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@ttìàÔ‡î[´î»¼K-ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@WW$ìàAT€KNOXVILLEÔ#†¼K-»îî[´ #ԈРÖ& ÐÓ  ÓAssigned€on€Briefs€September€23,€2003Ð üL ÐÔ‡XYX»¼K-ÔÌò òÔ#†¼K-»XXY #ÔJERRY€LEE€COWANòòóó€v.€STATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóóÔ‡XYX»¼K-Ôó óÐ úJ ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Blount€CountyÐ ú J Ðà@@øøìàNo.€C„7085€€€€€€D.€Kelly€Thomas,€Jr.,€JudgeÐ æ 6 ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<©` AßÐ ªú  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€E2003„00652„CCA„R3„PC€Ð ¥õ  ÐDecember€15,€Ô_Ô2003Ô_ÔÐ ‘á  ÐßA€V) °°` dE<|` AßÐ }Í  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThe€petitioner,€Jerry€Lee€Cowan,€seeks€appellate€review€of€the€Blount€County€Circuit€Courtððs€denialÐ xÈ  Ðof€his€motion€to€reopen€his€1992€post„conviction€relief€petition.€€Finding€no€merit€in€the€appeal,€weÐ d´ Ðaffirm€the€lower€courtððs€judgment.Ð P  ÐÔ#†¼K-»XXY‚#ÔÔ‡XYX»¼K-ÔÓ±Óò òÌ€Tenn.€R.€App.€P.€3;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€is€Affirmed.ó óÐ (x ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼K-»àXY#ÔÔ‡XYX.¼K-ÔJames€Curwood€Witt,€Jr.,€óóJ.,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòDavid€H.€Wellesóó€andÐ P ÐòòRobert€W.€Wedemeyer,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð ì< ÐÌJerry€Lee€Cowan,€òòProóó€òòSe.óóÐ Ä ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€&€Reporter;€John€H.€Bledsoe,€Assistant€Attorney€General;€andÐ œì ÐJames€Michael€Taylor,€District€Attorney€General,€for€the€Appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð ˆØ ÐÓÓÌò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼K-»XXYÌ#ÔÔ‡XYX»¼K-ÔÐ `° ÐòòóóÔ#†¼K-»XXYü#ÔÓ  ÓÔ€XYX»¼K-ÔÌà  àà ` àOn€May€2,€1991,€in€response€to€the€petitionerððs€guilty€plea,€the€Blount€County€CircuitÐ 8!ˆ  ÐCourt€entered€a€judgment€convicting€the€petitioner€of€second€degree€murder€and€sentencing€him€toÐ $"t! Ðserve€35€years€as€a€multiple€offender€in€the€Department€of€Correction.€€On€October€16,€1992,€theÐ #`" Ðpetitioner€filed€a€petition€for€post„conviction€relief.€€On€April€12,€1993,€the€post„conviction€courtÐ ü#L# Ðentered€an€order€allowing€the€petitioner€to€withdraw€his€petition.€€On€February€28,€2003,€theÐ è$8 $ Ðpetitioner€moved€to€reopen€his€1992€post„conviction€petition.€€Ð Ô%$!% ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€motion€to€reopen€alleged€that€newly€discovered€evidence€that€the€victim€died€asÐ ¬'ü"' Ða€result€of€medical€malpractice€would€show€that€he€is€actually€innocent€of€the€homicide.€€The€motionÐ ˜(è#( Ðreveals€that€the€petitioner€shoved€the€victim,€his€three„year„old€stepson.€€The€child€sustained€injuriesÐ „)Ô$) Ðwhen€he€fell€as€a€result€of€the€petitionerððs€shove.€€The€petitioner€claimed€that€during€the€course€ofÐ p*À%* Ðmedical€treatment€for€the€childððs€injuries,€the€victim€lapsed€into€a€coma.€€The€child€ultimately€diedÐ \+¬&+ Ðwhen€his€family€terminated€life€support€measures.€€Further,€the€petitioner€alleged€in€his€motion€toÐ H,˜', Ðreopen€that€his€trial€counsel€was€aware,€and€failed€to€disclose,€that€medical€malpractice€resulted€inÐ 4-„(-ý Ðthe€victimððs€death.€€Based€upon€this€claim,€he€posited€that€his€guilty€plea€was€unknowing,€Ð ° Ðinvoluntary,€and€the€result€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel.€€He€also€alleged€that€counsel€failedÐ œì Ðto€inform€him€that€he€would€be€denied€parole€upon€attaining€his€release€eligibility€of€35€percent.€Ð ˆØ ÐFinally,€he€alleged€that€the€first€degree€murder€indictment€by€which€he€was€charged€was€defectiveÐ tÄ Ðbecause€it€failed€to€allege€the€date€of€the€offense.€€Ð `° ÐÌà  àà ` àOn€March€7,€2003,€the€post„conviction€court€found€that€the€motion€ð ðfails€to€set€forthÐ 8 ˆ Ðany€factual€basis€that€supports€reopening€the€petition€pursuant€to€T.C.A.€[section]€40„30„217.ðð€€TheÐ $ t Ðcourt€denied€the€motion€to€reopen.Ð  ` ÐÌà  àà ` àOn€March€17,€2003,€the€petitioner€filed€a€notice€of€appeal.Ð è 8  Ðà  àà ` àÌà  àà ` àTennessee€Code€Annotated€section€40„30„117€provides:Ð À  ÐÌÒ` °ÒÒ` °Òà ¸ à(a)€A€petitioner€may€file€a€motion€in€the€trial€court€to€reopenÐ ˜è  Ðthe€first€post-conviction€petition€only€if€the€following€applies:Ð „Ô  ÐÌà ¸ à(1)€€The€claim€in€the€motion€is€based€upon€a€final€ruling€of€anÐ \¬ Ðappellate€court€establishing€a€constitutional€right€that€was€notÐ H˜ Ðrecognized€as€existing€at€the€time€of€trial,€if€retrospective€applicationÐ 4„ Ðof€that€right€is€required.€€Such€motion€must€be€filed€within€one€(1)Ð  p Ðyear€of€the€ruling€of€the€highest€state€appellate€court€or€the€UnitedÐ  \ ÐStates€supreme€court€establishing€a€constitutional€right€that€was€notÐ øH Ðrecognized€as€existing€at€the€time€of€trial;€€orÐ ä4 ÐÌà ¸ à(2)€The€claim€in€the€motion€is€based€upon€new€scientificÐ ¼  Ðevidence€establishing€that€such€petitioner€is€actually€innocent€of€theÐ ¨ø Ðoffense€or€offenses€for€which€the€petitioner€was€convicted;€€orÐ ”ä ÐÌà ¸ à(3)€The€claim€asserted€in€the€motion€seeks€relief€from€aÐ l¼ Ðsentence€that€was€enhanced€because€of€a€previous€conviction€andÐ X ¨ Ðsuch€conviction€in€the€case€in€which€the€claim€is€asserted€was€not€aÐ D!” Ðguilty€plea€with€an€agreed€sentence,€and€the€previous€conviction€hasÐ 0"€  Ðsubsequently€been€held€to€be€invalid,€in€which€case€the€motion€mustÐ #l! Ðbe€filed€within€one€(1)€year€of€the€finality€of€the€ruling€holding€theÐ $X" Ðprevious€conviction€to€be€invalid;€€andÐ ô$D # ÐÌà ¸ à(4)€It€appears€that€the€facts€underlying€the€claim,€if€true,€wouldÐ Ì&"% Ðestablish€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence€that€the€petitioner€isÐ ¸'#& Ðentitled€to€have€the€conviction€set€aside€or€the€sentence€reduced.Ð ¤(ô#' ÐÌà ¸ à(b)€The€motion€must€set€out€the€factual€basis€underlying€itsÐ |*Ì%) Ðclaims€and€must€be€supported€by€affidavit.€€The€factual€informationÐ h+¸&* Ðset€out€in€the€affidavit€shall€be€limited€to€information€which,€ifÐ ° Ðoffered€at€an€evidentiary€hearing,€would€be€admissible€through€theÐ œì Ðtestimony€of€the€affiant€under€the€rules€of€evidence.€€The€motion€shallÐ ˆØ Ðbe€denied€unless€the€factual€allegations,€if€true,€meet€the€requirementsÐ tÄ Ðof€subsection€(a).€€If€the€court€grants€the€motion,€the€procedure,€reliefÐ `° Ðand€appellate€provisions€of€this€part€shall€apply.Ð L œ ÐÌÒ°` ÒÒ°` ÒÓÓTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„117(a),€(b)€(2003).€€Ð $ t ÐÓÓà  àà ` àAppellate€review€of€the€denial€of€a€motion€to€reopen€a€petition€for€post„convictionÐ ü L  Ðrelief€is€also€governed€by€statute,€rather€than€by€the€Rules€of€Appellate€Procedure:Ð è 8  ÐÌÒ` °ÒÒ` °ÒIf€the€motion€[to€reopen]€is€denied,€the€petitioner€shall€have€ten€(10)Ð À  Ðdays€to€file€an€òòapplicationóó€in€the€court€of€criminal€appeals€òòseekingÐ ¬ü  Ðpermission€to€appealóó.€€The€application€shall€be€òòaccompanied€byÐ ˜è  Ðcopies€of€all€the€documents€filed€by€both€parties€in€the€trial€court€andÐ „Ô  Ðthe€order€denying€the€motionóó.€€The€state€shall€have€ten€(10)€days€toÐ pÀ Ðrespond.€€The€court€of€criminal€appeals€shall€not€grant€the€applicationÐ \¬ Ðunless€it€appears€that€the€trial€court€abused€its€discretion€in€denyingÐ H˜ Ðthe€motion.€€If€it€determines€that€the€trial€court€did€so€abuse€itsÐ 4„ Ðdiscretion,€the€court€of€criminal€appeals€shall€remand€the€matter€to€theÐ  p Ðtrial€court€for€further€proceedings.Ð  \ ÐÌÒ°` ÒÒ°` Ò€Tenn.€Code€€Ann.€ðð€40-30-117(c)€(2003)€(emphasis€added).€€ð ðIn€order€to€obtain€appellate€review€ofÐ ä4 Ðthe€trial€courtððs€order,€a€petitioner€must€comply€with€the€statutory€requirements.€€The€Rules€ofÐ Ð  ÐAppellate€Procedure€do€not€provide€for€an€appeal€as€of€right€in€these€cases.ðð€€€òòJohn€Harold€Williams,Ð ¼  ÐJr.€v.€Stateóó,€No.€W1999-01731-CCA-R3-PC€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Jackson,€Mar.€23,€2000)€(order),Ð ¨ø Ðòòperm.€app.€deniedóó€(Tenn.€2000);€òòsee€William€Lee€Drumbarger€v.€Stateóó,€No.€M1999-01444-CCA-R3„Ð ”ä ÐPC,€slip€op.€at€2€n.1€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Nashville,€Dec.€7,€1999)€(Rules€of€Appellate€Procedure€notÐ €Ð Ðapplicable€to€application€for€permission€to€appeal€the€denial€of€motion€to€reopen€post„convictionÐ l¼ Ðproceeding).Ð X ¨ ЀÌà  àà ` àThe€petitionerððs€notice€of€appeal,€although€filed€within€ten€days€of€the€entry€of€theÐ 0"€  Ðorder€denying€the€motion€to€reopen,€does€not€comply€with€the€statutory€requirement€of€an€applicationÐ #l! Ðfor€permission€to€appeal.€€€For€this€reason€alone,€the€appeal€is€subject€to€dismissal;€however,€as€aÐ $X" Ðdispensation€to€the€petitioner,€we€have€considered€whether€we€should€treat€the€notice€of€appeal€andÐ ô$D # Ðthe€petitionerððs€brief€as€a€òòde€factoóó€application€for€permission€to€appeal.€€In€so€doing,€we€areÐ à%0!$ Ðcompelled€to€agree€with€the€post„conviction€court€that€the€claims€contained€in€the€motion€to€reopenÐ Ì&"% Ðdo€not€fit€within€the€permissive€rubrics€of€Code€section€40„30„117(a).€€Ð ¸'#& ÐÌà  àà ` àAlthough€the€petitioner€claims€that€his€homicide€charge€is€baseless€because€the€victimÐ )à$( Ðdied€as€a€result€of€medical€malpractice,€we€fail€to€see€how€that€claim,€as€alleged€and€as€articulatedÐ |*Ì%) Ðin€the€petitionerððs€brief,€qualifies€as€new€scientific€evidence€that€the€petitioner€is€actually€innocent.€Ð h+¸&* ÐApparently,€the€current€scientific€knowledge€about€the€victimððs€death€was€available€at€the€time€ofÐ ° Ðdeath€or€shortly€thereafter,€and€furthermore,€the€claim€does€not€address€the€legal€conundrum€that€theÐ œì Ðpetitioner€is€liable€for€the€victimððs€death€despite€the€contribution€of€any€unfortunate€malpractice€byÐ ˆØ Ðmedical€personnel.€€€òòSee€Gray€v.€Stateóó,€194€Tenn.€234,€244,€250€S.W.2d€86,€90„91€(1952)€(ð ðToÐ tÄ Ðwarrant€the€escape€of€the€person€inflicting€the€injury€from€responsibility€for€the€killing,€theÐ `° Ðsubsequent€neglect€or€mismanagement€must€have€been€the€sole€cause€of€death.ðð);€òòOdeneal€v.€State,Ð L œ Ðóó128€Tenn.€60,€68,€157€S.W.€419,€421€(1913)€(ð ðOne€who€unlawfully€inflicts€a€dangerous€wound€uponÐ 8 ˆ Ðanother€is€held€for€the€consequences€flowing€from€such€injury,€whether€the€sequence€be€direct€orÐ $ t Ðthrough€the€operation€of€intermediate€agencies€dependent€upon€and€arising€out€of€the€original€cause.€Ð  ` ÐOne€of€these€dependent€occurrences€is€the€necessity€of€surgical€aid,€which€may€eventuate€as€theÐ ü L  Ðimmediate€cause€of€death.ðð).€€Thus,€the€conclusory€allegations€of€the€motion€to€reopen€fail€toÐ è 8  Ðillustrate€that€the€petitioner€is€actually€innocent€of€the€conviction€offense.€€Ð Ô$  ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€petitionerððs€claim€that€the€indictment€is€infirm€is€not€cognizable€in€the€òòde€facto€óóÐ ¬ü  Ðapplication€for€permission€to€appeal.€€The€indictment€is€not€included€in€the€motion€or€in€the€appellateÐ ˜è  Ðrecord€as€a€whole,€and€it€is€not€before€us€for€review.€€€Furthermore,€the€claimed€deficiencies€of€theÐ „Ô  Ðindictment€do€not€appear€to€fit€within€any€of€the€permissive€rubrics€of€Code€section€40„30„117(a).€Ð pÀ ÐÌà  àà ` àFinally,€we€have€reviewed€the€transcript€of€the€petitionerððs€May€1,€1991€pleaÐ H˜ Ðsubmission€hearing€that€was€filed€in€the€post„conviction€court€on€January€25,€1993,€and€was€includedÐ 4„ Ðwithin€the€appellate€record.€€The€transcript€reveals€that€the€petitioner€entered€a€best„interests€plea€ofÐ  p Ðguilty€to€second€degree€murder€as€a€means€of€avoiding€a€potential€penalty€for€first€degree€murder.€Ð  \ ÐThe€trial€court€engaged€the€petitioner€in€a€full€review€of€his€rights€and€options,€and€the€transcriptÐ øH Ðreflects€that€the€petitioner€actively€waived€his€rights€and€assented€to€the€plea€and€the€stipulatedÐ ä4 Ðpenalty.€€€Furthermore,€the€court€thoroughly€explained€to€the€petitioner€the€meaning€of€releaseÐ Ð  Ðeligibility€and€that€ultimately€the€release€date€would€depend€upon€the€administrative€decision€of€theÐ ¼  ÐDepartment€of€Correction.€€The€petitioner€acknowledged€his€understanding€of€the€statutory€releaseÐ ¨ø Ðeligibility€scheme.€€Ð ”ä ÐÌà  àà ` àAccordingly,€we€discern€no€basis€for€granting€permission€to€appeal.€€We€note€that,Ð l¼ Ðin€his€motion€and€brief,€the€petitioner€acknowledges€that€he€filed€the€2003€motion€to€reopen€after€heÐ X ¨ Ðwas€denied€parole.€€We€also€note€that€although€the€petitioner€withdrew€his€initial€post„convictionÐ D!” Ðpetition€on€April€12,€1993,€he€had€until€May€2,€1994€to€re„file€a€petition€for€post„conviction€relief.€Ð 0"€  ÐòòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„102€(1990)€(amended€1995)€(establishing€a€three„year€statute€ofÐ #l! Ðlimitations).€€We€remind€the€petitioner€that€the€state€has€a€valid€and€preeminent€interest€in€the€finalityÐ $X" Ðof€criminal€convictions.€€òòState€ex€rel€Stewart€v.€McWherteróó,€€857€S.W.2d€875,€877€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð ô$D # Ð1992).€€For€this€reason,€ð ð[t]ime€is€of€the€essence€of€the€right€to€file€a€petition€for€post-convictionÐ à%0!$ Ðrelief€or€motion€to€reopen€established€by€[the€post„conviction]€chapter.€.€.€.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€Ð Ì&"% Ð40-30-102(a)€(2003).Ð ¸'#& ÐÌà  àà ` àDiscerning€no€basis€for€granting€an€appeal€in€this€cause,€we€deny€the€òòde€facto€óóÐ )à$( Ðapplication€and€dismiss€the€appeal.€Ð |*Ì%) ÐÐ h+¸&* Ѐ€à  àÐ ° Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð œì Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àJAMES€CURWOOD€WITT,€JR.,€JUDGEÐ ˆØ Ð