WPC4 I $*_׷ƒ}^RW+8PlHVcczAHStJ-l#!, 䑣~G%]L L'2Ul >}|C\&I =\L)Vވn]"g X#粯ߪ;YQO|Z].PRFcx?'Ϊ4 1APyΞ+aKb#\ % ^ # 0/ UN w 4 z  i x mz  $v 0D<Ns+E "**********************b)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))))) 01111 B 09 D3 D- 0K== AS 0 0DE AHP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 60*+ (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman RegularYo)bk1仠 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|xU  RX$      1    _Otherthanthepetitionerspetitionforwritofhabeascorpusandtheorderdenyingreliefonthepetition,the  recordconsistsofonejudgmentform;variousmiscellaneousorders;aClintonCountySheriffDepartmentsinmatearrest t report,presumablyfromtheIndianacountyinwhichthepetitionerwasarrestedafterhisflightfromTennessee;and 8 several offendersentenceletters,apparentlyissuedbytheWestTennesseeHighSecurityFacility.Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#$  0   i RX$      4    _Sincethepetitionerwasconvictedin1991,hewassubjecttoathreeyearstatuteoflimitationsonbringinga  petitionforpostconvictionrelief.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4030102(1986)(repealed1995). ! RX$      2    _ItdoesnotappearthatthepetitionerhaspreviouslyattackedhisTennesseeconvictionsbyeitheradirectappeal  orpostconvictionpleading.   RX$      3    _Althoughtherearetwojudgments,presumably,reflectingthetwoconvictionsassailedbythepetitioner,the  singlejudgmentcontainedintherecordshowsthathewassentencedonNovember22,1991,toaperiodoftwelveyears t forrape,andthatthissentencewasconsecutivetothatimposedinindictment11798.Hereceivedtwodaysjailcredit. 8 Thisrapesentencewouldnothaveexpired,muchlessbothsentences,evenifthepetitionerhadgoneintocustodyon L thedateofitsimposition,whichdidnotoccurbecausehehadfledthejurisdiction.- -(|G2X$ !.8E=dd8         0   d(|3y$ !.8E=dd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3y$ !.8E=dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8E=dd8     _   E=8qXXdd8@ttBE=INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @%ATJACKSON#E=B #Ԉ &    @  @` AssignedonBriefsAugust7,2001 L XqXE= #E=XXq#RONALDCRAFTONv.JAYDUKES,WardenXqXE=  J @@ DirectAppealfromtheCircuitCourtforLauderdaleCounty  J @@No.5450JosephH.Walker,Judge  6 @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.W200100320CCAR3COFiledSeptember6,_2001_   AV) ` dE<|` A }     Thepetitionerappealsthetrialcourtsdismissalofhispetitionforhabeascorpusrelief.Thetrial x  courtdeterminedthattheallegationscontainedinthepetitionersprosepetitionwerenotonesthat d wouldentitlehimtohabeascorpusrelief,andthereforedismissedhispetition.Afteracareful P reviewoftherecord,weaffirmthetrialcourtsdismissalofthepetition.#E=XXq#XqXE= <  Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheCircuitCourtAffirmed  d   #E=Xq#XqX.E=AlanE.Glenn,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichDavidG.HayesandJoeG.Riley, < JJ.,joined. ( RonaldCrafton,Henning,Tennessee,ProSe.  PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneralandReporter;andMarkE.Davidson,AssistantAttorney  General,fortheappellee,StateofTennessee. t l@@OO& OPINION #E=XXq#XqXE= L  #E=Xq #  XqX.E=  Fromtheextremelysparserecordinthiscase,  #  1      ׀itappearsthatonNovember7,1991,the $"t! petitioner,RonaldCrafton,wasconvictedintheCircuitCourtofHenryCountyoftwocountsof #`" rape,aClassBfelony.Afterhisconviction,whileoutonbondawaitingsentencing,heapparently #L# leftthestate.Accordingtothepetitioner,hewassubsequentlysentencedinabsentiatotwelveyears $8 $ oneachcount,withthesentencestobeservedconsecutively,foraneffectivesentenceoftwentyfour %$!% years.OnApril26,1994,hewastransportedfromIndiana,wherehewasincarcerated,backto &"& TennesseetobeginserviceofhisTennesseesentences. '"'  (#(   OnDecember14,2000,thepetitionerfiledaprosepetitionforwritofhabeascorpus #  2      ׀inthe  CircuitCourtofLauderdaleCounty.Heallegedthathisoriginalcomputerprintoutsheetsissuedat  WestTennesseeStatePenitentiaryshowedthathistimebegantorunonNovember7,1991,andthat  hewastoldbyadeputyattheHenryCountyJailthatthejudgewas givinghimthattimebecause t hehad notbeeninanytrouble.HeallegedthatthetrialcourtunlawfullyresentencedhimonApril ` 24,1994,whenhewasoutsidethecountysjurisdiction,changinghissentenceeffectivedatetoApril L  26,1994.Heclaimedthattherewerenofactorsjustifyinghisreceivingthemaximumsentences 8  withintherangeofpunishment.Hefurtherallegedthatthetrialcourtsorderofconsecutive $ t sentencingwasillegal,becauseitwasunaccompaniedbyanyfindingsoffactbythetrialcourt  ` reflectingthenecessityofconsecutivesentencing.Accordingtohisargument,heisentitledto  L  habeascorpusreliefbecause,ifsentencedproperly,hissentenceswouldhaveexpired.  8    OnJanuary9,2001,thecourtdismissedthepetitionerspetition,findingthathehadfailed   toallegeanygroundsthatwouldentitlehimtohabeascorpusrelief.Thereafter,onFebruary6,   2001,thepetitionerfiledatimelyappealtothiscourt,challengingthetrialcourtsdismissalofhis   petition.   @& ANALYSIS \    Thepetitionercontendsthatthetrialcourterredindismissinghispetition.Heallegesthat 4 theHenryCountytrialcourtimposedanunlawfulsentencebyinappropriatelyapplyingenhancement  p factorstosentencehimatthetopoftherange,failingtofollowthestatutoryguidelinesinimposing  \ consecutivesentences,andchanginghissentenceeffectivedatewhenhewasoutofthejurisdiction. H Thepetitionerfurtherallegesthatthecourtclerk falsifiedandbackdatedacertificatetochange 4 theeffectivedatesofhissentence,therebyviolatinghisdueprocessrightsundertheFifth   AmendmentoftheUnitedStatesConstitution.TheStaterespondsthatthepetitionersallegations,   eveniftrue,wouldrenderhissentencevoidable,ratherthanvoid,andarguesthatthetrialcourt  properlydismissedthepetitionforitsfailuretostateappropriategroundsforhabeascorpusrelief.    ItiswellestablishedinTennesseethattheremedyprovidedbyawritofhabeascorpusis l limitedinscopeandmayonlybeinvokedwherethejudgmentisvoidorthepetitionerstermof X  imprisonmenthasexpired.Statev.Ritchie,20S.W.3d624,629(Tenn.2000);Statev.Davenport, D! 980S.W.2d407,409(Tenn.Crim.App.1998);Passarellav.State,891S.W.2d619,626(Tenn. 0"  Crim.App.1994).Toobtainhabeascorpusrelief,thepetitionermustshowbyapreponderanceof #l! theevidencethathissentenceisvoidandnotmerelyvoidable.SeeDavenport,980S.W.2dat409; $X" Passarella,891S.W.2dat627.Avoid,asopposedtoavoidable,judgmenthasbeendefinedbyour $D # supremecourtas oneinwhichthejudgmentisfaciallyinvalidbecausethecourtdidnothavethe %0!$ statutoryauthoritytorendersuchjudgment.Dykesv.Compton,978S.W.2d528,529(Tenn. &"% 1998);seealsoTaylorv.State,995S.W.2d78,83(Tenn.1999).Thejudgmentofacourtofgeneral '#& jurisdictionisconclusiveandpresumedtobevalid,andsuchajudgmentcanonlybeimpeachedif (#' therecordaffirmativelyshowsthattherenderingcourtwaswithoutpersonalorsubjectmatter  jurisdiction.Archerv.State,851S.W.2d157,162(Tenn.1993);Passarella,891S.W.2dat626.  Thepetitionercannotcollaterallyattackafaciallyvalidjudgmentofthetrialcourtinapetitionfor  habeascorpusrelief.Archer,851S.W.2dat162.Thus,habeascorpusreliefisavailableonlywhen t  itappearsuponthefaceofthejudgmentortherecordoftheproceedingsuponwhichthejudgment ` isrenderedthataconvictingcourtwaswithoutjurisdictionorauthoritytosentenceadefendant,or L  thatadefendantssentenceofimprisonment...hasexpired.Id.at164(citationomitted). 8    Afteracarefulreview,weconcludethatthetrialcourtproperlydismissedthepetitioners  ` petitionforitsfailuretoallegegroundsthatwouldentitlehimtohabeascorpusrelief.AstheState  L  pointsout,thepetitionerdoesnotallegethattheCircuitCourtofHenryCountylackedeither  8  personalorsubjectmatterjurisdictioninthecase.Inarguingthatthetrialcourtunlawfullyaltered $  hissentence,thepetitionerappearstoprincipallyrelyonthefactthatatleastonecomputerprintout   letterissuedbytheprisonsystemreflectedhis sentenceeffectivedateasNovember5,1991,while   insubsequentlyissuedlettersthedatewasrecordedasApril24,1994. #  3      ׀However,anerrormadeby   prisonofficialsortheprisoncomputersysteminrecordingthepetitionerssentenceandparoledates   wouldnotrenderthejudgmentoftheHenryCountyCircuitCourtvoid.Asthetrialcourtnoted,the p propermethodforthepetitionertochallengehistimecreditsorparoledatesisthroughtheavenues \ oftheUniformAdministrativeProceduresAct,TennesseeCodeAnnotatedSections45101to325. H SeeBrighamv.Lack,755S.W.2d469,471(Tenn.Crim.App.1988).Wefurthernotethatthe 4 propermethodforthepetitionertochallengeafaciallyvalidjudgmentbasedonaconstitutional  p violationwouldhavebeeninapetitionforpostconvictionrelief.Lewisv.Metro.Gen.Sessions  \ CourtforNashville,949S.W.2d696,699(Tenn.Crim.App.1996);Fredrickv.State,906S.W.2d H 927,929(Tenn.Crim.App.1993).d #  4      ׀Thus,wedonotacceptthepetitionerscircularargumentthat 4 hissentences,thoughfaciallyvalid,arenotactuallysobecauseofsentencingirregularities.   @FF% CONCLUSION     Basedonacarefulreview,weconcludethatthetrialcourtdidnoterrinfindingthatthe  petitionfailedtoallegegroundsthatwouldentitlehimtohabeascorpusrelief.Accordingly,we  l affirmthetrialcourtsdismissalofthepetition.   p          `     h     ___________________________________ L     `     h     ALANE.GLENN,JUDGE