ÿWPCI =ø•×!8þï°žm vEœ©a‚Ên–.I<Ó5¨‰3þô°9•ó!12YÑ€ê´Úv_Š¯Ø ´#ìX?›9iż 1Z8†øJÈ»%ó5޵î.êGª…mä :1]Áªäú>§ã¦_ßc!D¦Ã ¨üÖâv {Ϧ< ŠÄ§Äà[LêÆRýoš˜kÄwY†|ê;BƆÿ#  ›%U%\‚C"ÎB_ƒ÷Ý$ÊÿOêö!ýMÁzBŸ/؃àž¤yw1õY­…öe2Žƒ—G(°ÑÞɸ˟֔_Ïn媙”èkÝ¡ó¸Oe±ÏüGh梿dðsR”çÖnÉ"Ȫ«ºtÛxF}BŸ²Ÿâqþû>ÐÈk/¯ñp €••šH-ÙäA4±ÃÚâãLÅgD~í¶MáÍÐ1;:©Žè;hê}Læ(q«1Ípèôï]%‘ïÒ{wîä‚™õŽÒKQ$É :¿ÕhT&|É¢+—kþC´¿¹ïå ” ó+ ½¡"¢­ü ì£" §C¹†åéž§Æ™1T2Æ Aà<7A¬a~ÚÎYÃ¥UjÝX6Vß§~ ¦'ýŒeÕ[÷ðªôa ­ë"lcWÁïäÇ”ÅÌb#É\ %% U@+ 0ˆk UNó ^ A wM zQ ÒË 4 ± À À ÆÂ ƈ ÆNÆ 0DÚN m 77En~pppNîîîîîîîîîîîîîîîîîîîîb<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< 0ëDDDD B// 0¤L D5ð D-% 0KRR ASÆð 0¤¶ 0DZ A«ž˜\\IB01S02\CLERKJACÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»(ÈhH  Z(Times New Roman (`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular1z=1Ï  ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt ~‰/ê:i¢×+003|xLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ -Ý ƒRž;$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôµlò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThe€photograph€taken€at€the€time€of€his€arrest€shows€the€petitioner€dressed€in€a€medium€to€dark€blue€hoodedÐ ° Ðsweatshirt,€dark€gray€jacket,€and€gray€jeans.€€ tÝ ƒRž;$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôµlò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔPost„conviction€counsel€introduced€as€an€exhibit€to€the€evidentiary€hearing€a€letter€from€Willaine€Hampton,Ð ° Ðmanager€of€ð ðMemphis€Police€Communications,ðð€stating€that€the€dispatch€records€for€1994€were€no€longer€available.  J.C.McLinmisindictedConleydiredCreightonVoyleinsist[sStineWillaineTidwellHellardJeannineHarrell substantiate[sVoyles- ù-(|G2ž;$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€žq»»dXXdé8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôµlò»»Ô d(|3o$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€žq»»dXXdé8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3o$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€žq»»dXXdé8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€žq»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼žq»»»ÔÑ8€ÝGXXdé»»d8Ñà@hhìàÔ‡î{VžqÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@òò%ìàAT€JACKSONÔ#†¼žq»îî{V#ԈРÓ# ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àJuly€13,€2004€SessionÐ öF ÐÔ‡XÝGX»¼žqÔÌò òÔ#†¼žq»XXÝG!#ÔANTHONY€D.€CUTTLEòòóó€v.€STATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóóÔ‡XÝGX»¼žqÔó óÐ ï? ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òDirect€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Shelby€CountyÐ é 9 Ðà@@øøìàNo.€P„20307€€€€€€J.C.€McLin,€JudgeÐ Ó # ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<` AßÐ ‘á  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€W2003„00684„CCA„R3„PC€€„€Filed€September€28,€Ô_Ô2004Ô_ÔÐ ŠÚ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<]` AßÐ ^®  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThe€petitioner€appeals€the€denial€of€his€petition€for€post„conviction€relief,€arguing€that€the€post„Ð V¦  Ðconviction€court€erred€in€finding€he€received€effective€assistance€of€counsel€and€in€denying€hisÐ ? Ðrequest€to€represent€himself€at€the€post„conviction€proceeding.€€òòóóFollowing€our€review,€we€affirm€theÐ (x Ðdenial€of€the€petition.€Ô#†¼žq»XXÝGš#ÔÔ‡XÝGX»¼žqÔÐ a ÐÓ¾ÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€Affirmedó óÐ ã3 ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼žq»àXÝGr#ÔÔ‡XÝGX.¼žqÔAlan€E.€Glenn,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòNorma€McGee€Ogle,€J.óó,€joined.€Ð ¶ ÐòòJohn€Everett€Williams,€J.óó,€filed€a€concurring€opinion.Ð Ÿï ÐÌMarty€B.€McAfee,€Memphis,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Anthony€D.€Cuttle.Ð qÁ ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Jennifer€L.€Ô_ÔBledsoeÔ_Ô,€Assistant€Attorney€General;Ð C“ ÐWilliam€L.€Gibbons,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Vanessa€King,€Assistant€District€AttorneyÐ ,| ÐGeneral,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ô#†¼žq»XXÝGS#ÔÔ‡XÝGX»¼žqԀРe ÐÓ$ÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼žq»XXÝG÷ #ÔÔ‡XÝGX»¼žqÔÐ ç 7  ÐòòóóÔ#†¼žq»XXÝG #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€XÝGX»¼žqÔÌà@Ü Ü ìàò òòòFACTS€AND€PROCEDURAL€HISTORY€óóó óˆÐ º" " ÐÌà  àIn€August€1995,€the€petitioner,€Anthony€D.€Cuttle,€was€tried€in€the€Shelby€County€CriminalÐ $Ý$ ÐCourt€on€two€counts€of€attempted€especially€aggravated€Ô_ÔkidnappingÔ_Ô.€€The€jury€acquitted€him€of€oneÐ v%Æ % Ðcount€but€convicted€him€of€the€other,€for€which€he€received€a€twenty„year€sentence€in€theÐ _&¯!& ÐDepartment€of€Correction€as€a€Range€II€offender.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Anthony€D.€Cuttleóó,€No.€02C01„9605„Ð H'˜"' ÐCR„00153,€1997€WL€730255,€at€*1€(Tenn.€Ô_ÔCrimÔ_Ô.€App.€Nov.€25,€1997),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóóÐ 1(#( Ð(Tenn.€July€13,€1998).€€The€petitionerððs€conviction€and€sentence€were€subsequently€affirmed€by€thisÐ )j$) Ðcourt,€and€our€supreme€court€denied€his€application€for€permission€to€appeal.€€òòId.óó€€Ð *S%* ÐÌà  àOur€direct€appeal€opinion€provides€the€following€account€of€the€crime:€Ð Õ+%', Ðâ âÐ ¾,(-ý ÐÔ_Ôà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àOn€the€night€of€April€5,€1994,€the€victim,€Norma€Voyles€was€Ð ° Ðâ âsitting€in€her€car€outside€her€home€when€the€[petitioner]€approached€Ð ™é Ðher€vehicle,€stuck€a€gun€to€her€head,€and€ordered€her€to€open€the€door.Ð ‚Ò ÐWhen€the€[petitioner]€insisted€on€taking€the€driverððs€seat,€the€victimÐ k» Ðstruggled€and€managed€to€escape€to€the€driveway€where€theÐ T¤ Ð[petitioner]€held€his€cocked€gun€to€her€head€and€threatened€to€kill€her.€Ð =  ÐThe€struggle€lasted€for€around€ten€minutes€before€the€victimððs€sonÐ & v Ðheard€the€screams€and€emerged€from€their€residence.€€At€that€point,Ð  _ Ðthe€[petitioner]€pushed€the€victim€to€the€ground€and€ran€away.€Ðø H` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThe€victim€called€police€who€arrived€some€five€minutes€later.€Ð Ê   ÐWhen€the€investigating€officers€received€word€that€a€man€fitting€theÐ ³  Ðassailantððs€description€had€been€taken€into€custody,€the€victim€wasÐ œì  Ðasked€to€make€an€identification.€€Initially€uncertain,€the€victim€madeÐ …Õ  Ða€positive€identification€after€the€[petitioner]€put€on€the€hood€of€hisÐ n¾  Ðsweatshirt.€€Later,€the€victim€was€able€to€identify€the€[petitioner]€twoÐ W§  Ðmore€times,€once€in€a€lineup€at€the€police€station€and€again€at€theÐ @ Ðpreliminary€hearing.€Ð)y` x` x Ðà  àà ` àÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àOn€the€same€night,€only€a€few€minutes€later,€Debra€HannaÐ ûK Ðwas€attacked€by€a€man€she€identified€as€the€[petitioner].€€She€statedÐ ä4 Ðthat€as€she€was€unlocking€her€residence€door,€the€[petitioner]Ð Í Ðapproached€her€holding€a€gun.€€Ms.€Hanna€was€able€to€get€inside,Ð ¶ Ðlock€the€door,€and€call€police.€€Within€ten€minutes,€police€arrived€andÐ Ÿï Ðreported€that€they€had€taken€a€man€into€custody€only€a€few€housesÐ ˆØ Ðaway,€who€fit€her€description€of€the€attacker.€€When€escorted€by€theÐ qÁ Ðpolice€to€where€the€[petitioner]€was€held,€Ms.€Hanna€identified€theÐ Zª Ð[petitioner]€as€her€assailant.€€ÐC“` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ à.€.€.€.€When€apprehended,€the€[petitioner]€was€carrying€aÐ e Ðbutcher€knife€but€had€no€gun.ÐþN` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àAt€trial,€the€[petitioner]€denied€any€involvement€in€eitherÐ Ð!   Ðattack.€€He€claimed€that€he€and€a€friend€had€been€visiting€with€hisÐ ¹" ! Ðcousin.€€He€asserted€that€he€had€decided€to€visit€his€ex„girlfriend,Ð ¢#ò" Ðwalked€over€to€her€apartment,€and,€unable€to€locate€her,€was€returningÐ ‹$Û# Ðto€his€cousinððs€residence€when€stopped€by€police.Ðt%Ä $` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àAntoine€Thompson,€a€witness€for€the€defense,€claimed€that€heÐ F'–"& Ðand€the€[petitioner]€were€at€a€mutual€friendððs€residence€watchingÐ /(#' Ðtelevision€until€sometime€between€10:30€and€11:30€p.m.€€ThompsonÐ )h$( Ðrecalled€that€when€he€went€to€bed,€the€[petitioner]€was€still€at€theÐ *Q%) Ðresidence.€€Ðê*:&*` x` x ÐòòId.óó€€Ð Ó+#'+ Ðà  àà ` àÌà  àThe€post„conviction€proceedings€in€this€case€are€somewhat€complex.€€Although€not€includedÐ ™é Ðin€the€record,€the€petitioner€apparently€filed€an€original€òòpro€se€óópetition€for€post„conviction€relief€inÐ ‚Ò ÐAugust€1998,€which€was€summarily€dismissed€after€the€appointment€of€counsel.€€On€February€15,Ð k» Ð2001,€the€petitioner€filed€a€òòpro€se€óómotion€to€reopen€his€post„conviction€petition,€which€was,Ð T¤ Ðapparently,€granted€by€the€post„conviction€court.€€Counsel€was€subsequently€appointed€and€anÐ =  Ðamended€petition€for€post„conviction€relief,€incorporating€the€òòpro€se€óópetition€and€alleging€ineffectiveÐ & v Ðassistance€of€trial€counsel,€òòóówas€filed€on€November€6,€2001.€€The€amended€petition€was€followed€byÐ  _ Ða€supplemental€amended€petition€on€June€14,€2002,€and€a€second€supplemental€amended€petition€onÐ ø H ÐOctober€29,€2002,€which,€together,€alleged€counsel€was€ineffective,€òòinter€alia,€óófor€failing€toÐ á 1  Ðòòóóadequately€investigate€and€prepare€for€the€case,€failing€to€effectively€cross„examine€witnesses,€andÐ Ê   Ðrefusing€to€assist€the€petitioner€with€his€trial€testimony.Ð ³  ÐÌà  àThe€post„conviction€court€granted€the€petitionerððs€motion€to€proceed€òòpro€se€óóon€August€15,Ð …Õ  Ð2002,€but€reversed€itself€approximately€one€week€later,€reappointing€counsel€on€August€26.€€AnÐ n¾  Ðevidentiary€hearing,€at€which€the€post„conviction€court€allowed€both€counsel€and€the€petitioner€toÐ W§  Ðpresent€separate€proof€and€arguments,€was€held€on€September€26,€2002,€October€29,€2002,€andÐ @ ÐFebruary€7,€2003.€€On€October€29,€2002,€the€petitioner€filed€a€òòpro€seóó€amended€petition€for€post„Ð )y Ðconviction€relief.€€Ð b ÐÌà  àOn€March€7,€2003,€the€post„conviction€court€entered€a€detailed€written€order€denying€theÐ ä4 Ðpetition€for€post„conviction€relief.€€Different€counsel€was€appointed€to€represent€the€petitioner€onÐ Í Ðappeal,€and€a€notice€of€appeal€was€filed€that€same€day.€€Nonetheless,€the€petitioner€filed€a€òòpro€seóóÐ ¶ Ðnotice€of€appeal€on€March€13,€2003,€a€€òòpro€se€óóbrief€on€September€4,€2003,€and€a€òòpro€seóó€ð ðMotion€toÐ Ÿï ÐConsider€Appellantððs€Pro€Se€Brief€as€the€Initial€Briefðð€on€October€21,€2003.€€On€October€31,€2003,Ð ˆØ Ðthis€court€entered€an€order€denying€the€petitionerððs€motion€to€have€his€òòpro€se€óóbrief€considered€andÐ qÁ Ðordering€that€all€future€pleadings€be€filed€by€the€petitionerððs€appellate€counsel.€€On€November€6,Ð Zª Ð2003,€appellate€counsel€filed€his€brief€with€this€court.€€On€April€3,€2003,€the€petitioner€filed€a€òòproÐ C“ Ðse€óóð ðMotion€to€Dismiss€Court„Appointed€Appellate€Counsel,ðð€alleging€ineffective€assistance€ofÐ ,| Ðappellate€counsel€and€requesting€that€he€be€allowed€to€proceed€òòpro€seóó€with€his€appeal.€€This€courtÐ e Ðdenied€his€motion€by€order€entered€on€April€22,€2003.€Ð þN ÐÌà  àIn€his€òòpro€se€óópetitions€and€at€the€evidentiary€hearing,€the€petitioner€contended€he€was€entitledÐ Ð!   Ðto€post„conviction€relief€on€four€grounds:€òòóó(1)€he€was€unlawfully€arrested;€(2)€illegal€evidence€wasÐ ¹" ! Ðintroduced€at€his€trial;€(3)€the€prosecutor,€his€trial€counsel,€and€the€trial€court€conspired€to€suppressÐ ¢#ò" Ðexculpatory€evidence;€and€(4)€he€received€ineffective€assistance€of€trial€counsel.€€His€claim€ofÐ ‹$Û# Ðineffective€assistance€was€based€on€a€number€of€allegations,€including€that€counsel€conspired€withÐ t%Ä $ Ðthe€trial€court€and€the€prosecutor€to€suppress€a€police€dispatch€transcript,€which€would€have€shownÐ ]&­!% Ðthe€discrepancies€between€the€petitionerððs€appearance€at€the€time€of€his€arrest€and€the€descriptionsÐ F'–"& Ðthe€victims€provided€to€police€of€their€attacker,€as€well€as€the€time€that€elapsed€between€the€victimsððÐ /(#' Ðcalls€to€police;€counsel€failed€to€call€an€alibi€witness€to€testify€at€trial;€counsel€insisted€on€contactingÐ )h$( Ðthat€same€alibi€witness€despite€the€petitionerððs€instructions€to€stop€bothering€her;€counsel€failed€toÐ *Q%) Ðâ âcross„examine€the€victims€on€alleged€inconsistencies€in€their€testimony;€and€counsel€failed€toÐ ê*:&* Ðsubpoena€and€introduce€a€second€police€dispatch€record,€which€would€have€revealed€that€theÐ ° Ðpetitionerððs€arresting€officer€lied€and€framed€the€petitioner€for€the€crime.€Ð ™é Ðâ âÌà  àTrial€counsel,€who€had€thirty€years€experience€in€criminal€defense€at€the€time€of€theÐ k» Ðevidentiary€hearing,€testified€he€represented€the€petitioner€in€criminal€court€in€his€capacity€as€anÐ T¤ Ðassistant€public€defender.€€His€preparation€of€the€case€included€interviewing€€witnesses,€researchingÐ =  Ðthe€law,€and€reviewing€the€evidence.€€He€was€confident€he€received€and€reviewed€a€copy€of€theÐ & v Ðtranscript€of€the€preliminary€hearing.€€Trial€counsel€believed€one€of€the€central€issues€in€the€caseÐ  _ Ðinvolving€Ms.€Hanna€was€that€the€petitioner€was€ð ðmisindicted,ðð€because€the€facts€alleged€did€not€fitÐ ø H Ða€kidnapping.€€He€argued€the€issue€to€the€jury€and€believed€it€formed€the€basis€for€the€petitionerððsÐ á 1  Ðacquittal€on€that€count.€€Ð Ê   ÐÌà  àTrial€counsel€testified€the€petitioner€provided€him€with€the€names€of€two€potential€alibiÐ œì  Ðwitnesses:€Antoine€Thompson,€who€testified€at€trial€but€provided€less€than€an€airtight€alibi,€andÐ …Õ  ÐJeannine€Conley,€whom€the€petitioner€claimed€would€be€able€to€place€him€elsewhere€at€the€time€ofÐ n¾  Ðthe€attacks.€€Trial€counsel€said€Conley€informed€him€she€had€been€diagnosed€as€manic€depressive,Ð W§  Ðwas€on€medication€for€depression€and€hypertension,€and€could€not€recall€when€or€where€she€had€seenÐ @ Ðthe€petitioner.€€Therefore,€he€concluded€her€testimony€would€not€be€helpful.€€Ð )y ÐÌà  àTrial€counsel€testified€he€advised€the€petitioner€he€thought€it€would€be€devastating€for€theÐ ûK Ðpetitioner€to€testify€because€the€State€would€be€able€to€introduce€his€prior€conviction€for€murder€asÐ ä4 Ðwell€as€possibly€his€prior€armed€robbery€conviction.€€The€petitioner€agreed€and€maintainedÐ Í Ðthroughout€the€trial€that€he€did€not€wish€to€take€the€stand.€€However,€after€he€had€been€voir€diredÐ ¶ Ðabout€his€decision€not€to€testify€and€both€the€State€and€the€defense€had€rested,€he€suddenly€jumpedÐ Ÿï Ðto€his€feet€and€ð ðexplodedðð€with€the€announcement€that€he€now€wished€to€testify.€€€Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àTrial€counsel€acknowledged€he€was€probably€upset€with€the€petitioner€and€might€have€lostÐ Zª Ðhis€temper.€€As€for€whether€he€was€wrong€in€refusing€to€assist€the€petitionerððs€testimony,€counselÐ C“ Ðtestified€that€he€thought€asking€questions€would€ð ðcompound€the€damageðð€and€that€he€ð ðmay€haveÐ ,| Ðmade€a€mistake,ðð€but€thought€he€would€ð ðmake€the€same€.€.€.€€decision€again.ðð€€Trial€counselÐ e Ðconceded€the€petitionerððs€testimony€probably€would€have€been€smoother€had€he€directed€it.€€HeÐ þN Ðinsisted,€however,€that€his€participation€would€not€have€been€enough€to€ð ðovercome€the€devastatingÐ ç 7 Ðthings€that€occurred€from€[the€petitionerððs]€testimony.ðð€€Moreover,€he€would€not€have€been€able€toÐ Ð!   Ðcontrol€the€petitionerððs€demeanor€and€cocky€attitude.€€On€cross„examination,€trial€counsel€agreedÐ ¹" ! Ðthe€petitioner€would€not€have€been€able€to€explain€the€facts€underlying€his€prior€convictions€ifÐ ¢#ò" Ðcounsel€had€directed€his€testimony€by€asking€specific€questions€requiring€responsive€answers.€Ð ‹$Û# ÐCounsel€testified€he€had€gone€over€the€events€of€the€night€in€question€with€the€petitioner,€but€hadÐ t%Ä $ Ðnot€prepared€a€list€of€questions€because€the€petitioner€had€consistently€expressed€his€intention€of€notÐ ]&­!% Ðtestifying.€€In€trial€counselððs€opinion,€the€petitionerððs€testimony€resolved€in€favor€of€the€State€anyÐ F'–"& Ðdoubt€the€jury€may€have€had€about€his€guilt.€Ð /(#' ÐÌà  àTrial€counsel€acknowledged€his€file€contained€a€copy€of€a€police€report€showing€that€a€latentÐ *Q%) Ðfingerprint€lifted€from€the€victimððs€car€did€not€match€the€petitioner.€€He€could€not€recall€if€he€cross„Ð ê*:&* Ðexamined€any€police€officers€on€that€fact€and€did€not€think€he€called€the€fingerprint€technician€toÐ Ó+#'+ Ðtestify.€€However,€he€did€not€believe€the€fingerprint€evidence€would€have€helped€the€petitionerððsÐ ° Ðcase.€€Trial€counsel€testified€the€petitioner€wanted€him€to€introduce€a€dispatch€transcript€at€trial€thatÐ ™é Ðhe€believed€would€prove€he€was€not€the€perpetrator.€€In€counselððs€opinion,€the€evidence€would€haveÐ ‚Ò Ðhurt,€rather€than€helped,€the€petitionerððs€case,€as€he€explained:€Ð k» ÐÌÓ*°,XƒX" –X°œX*Óà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.à " àWell,€I€subpoenaed€the€records€from€the€dispatcher.€€And€as€IÐ =  Ðrecall€there€was€about€a€twenty€minute€gap€between€the€first€call€fromÐ & v ÐMs.€Voyles,€when€Ms.€Voyles€called€the€police€and€made€herÐ  _ Ðcomplaint€and€when€Ms.€Hanna€did€it.€€It€was€about€a€twenty€minuteÐ ø H Ðdifference.Ðá 1 ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà " àI€had€my€investigator€go€out€and€measure€the€distance€in€his€carÐ ³  Ðbetween€the€Creighton€address€where€Ms.€Hanna€was€and€the€NavahoÐ œì  Ðaddress€where€Ms.€Voyles€was.€€And€he€reported€back€that€it€wasÐ …Õ  Ðabout€a€mile€and€a€half€between€the€two€spots.€€In€my€calculation,€IÐ n¾  Ðmean,€certainly€a€car€could€travel€between€those€two€spots€in€lessÐ W§  Ðthan€twenty€minutes.Ð@` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.à " àSure.Ðb` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.à " àA€man€walking€fast€or€jogging€could€probably€do€it.€€I€didnððtÐ ä4 Ðthink€that€would€help€[the€petitioner]€to€show€that,€to€put€thatÐ Í Ðevidence€on€to€show€when€those€calls€were€made€to€the€dispatcher.€Ð ¶ ÐIn€fact,€I€thought€it€would€show€that€he€had€every€opportunity€to€beÐ Ÿï Ðat€both€places€that€night€because€of€the€difference€in€the€calls.€€If€theÐ ˆØ Ðcalls€had€come€in€a€minute€a€part€[sic],€I€certainly€would€had€done€it.€Ð qÁ ÐBut€there€was€a€twenty€„„€I€think€as€I€remember€right,€a€twenty€minuteÐ Zª Ðdifferential.ÐC“` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà " àAnd€as€I€should€say,€[the€petitioner]€wanted€me€to€do€it€anywayÐ e Ðand€thatððs€another€decision€I€made€on€my€own.ÐþN` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.à " àOkay.€€It€was€not€a€twenty€minute€move€but€twenty„fourÐ Ð!   Ðminutes,€something€like€that.€€Does€that€sound€about€right?й" !` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.à " àYeah,€thatððs€the€best€I€recollect.Ћ$Û#` x` x ÐÌà  àTrial€counsel€acknowledged€the€dispatch€transcript€described€Ms.€Voylesððs€attacker€as€aÐ ]&­!% Ðblack€male€in€his€late€teens€or€early€twenties,€although€the€petitioner€was€thirty€years€old€at€the€timeÐ F'–"& Ðof€the€crime.€€He€could€not€recall€if€the€clothing€description€contained€in€the€report€matched€theÐ /(#' Ðpetitionerððs€clothing,€but€thought€he€recalled€that€Ms.€Voyles,€who€was€a€ð ðvery€good€witness,ððÐ )h$( Ðdescribed€the€perpetratorððs€clothing€when€she€reported€the€crime€to€the€police€and€that€the€petitionerÐ *Q%) Ðwas€wearing€similar€clothing€when€arrested.€€In€addition,€he€believed€Ms.€Voyles€identified€theÐ ê*:&* Ðpetitioner€as€the€perpetrator€several€times,€including€at€the€time€of€his€arrest,€from€a€laterÐ Ó+#'+ Ðphotographic€lineup,€and€again€at€trial.€€According€to€trial€counsel,€Ms.€Voylesððs€testimony€formedÐ ° Ðthe€basis€for€the€Stateððs€case.€Ð ™é Ðà  àÌà  àDuring€the€petitionerððs€lengthy,€rambling,€and€repetitive€evidentiary€hearing€testimony,€heÐ k» Ðasserted,€òòinter€aliaóó,€òòóóthat€Memphis€Police€Officer€R.€D.€Harrell€framed€him€for€the€crime;€the€otherÐ T¤ Ðpolice€officers€who€testified€at€trial€committed€perjury€at€Officer€Harrellððs€behest;€trial€counsel,€theÐ =  Ðprosecutor,€and€the€trial€court€ð ðcovered€upðð€the€officerððs€actions€and€conspired€to€preventÐ & v Ðexculpatory€evidence,€in€the€form€of€the€dispatch€transcript€that€recorded€the€time€the€victimsÐ  _ Ðreported€the€attacks€and€the€perpetratorððs€description,€from€going€to€the€jury;€and€the€victims€liedÐ ø H Ðduring€their€testimony.€€The€petitioner€also€asserted€that€a€second€dispatch€transcript,€which€theÐ á 1  ÐMemphis€Police€Department€had€since€destroyed,€would€have€proved€he€was€arrested€less€than€tenÐ Ê   Ðminutes€after€leaving€his€home.€Ð ³  ÐÌà  àThe€record€reveals€the€alleged€ð ðexculpatoryðð€dispatch€transcript€was,€at€the€prosecutorððsÐ …Õ  Ðsuggestion,€marked€as€an€exhibit€at€the€trial€for€identification€purposes€after€defense€counsel€soughtÐ n¾  Ðand€received€the€trial€courtððs€approval€of€his€decision€not€to€call€the€police€dispatcher€as€a€witness.€Ð W§  ÐA€review€of€what€transpired€at€trial€is€helpful€in€understanding€the€petitionerððs€claim€with€respectÐ @ Ðto€this€evidence:Ð )y ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à[TRIAL€COUNSEL]:€€I€donððt€know,€we€may€have€to€excuse€the€juryÐ ûK Ðto€get€this€on€the€record,€I€donððt€know.€€But€this€man€I€have€underÐ ä4 Ðsubpoena,€a€dispatcher€with€the€Memphis€Police€Department,€whoÐ Í Ðwould€testify€when€the€calls,€complaints€came€in.€€And€of€course€theyÐ ¶ Ðsit€[sic]€exactly€with€what€the€prosecution€witnesses€have€testified€toÐ Ÿï Ðabout€when€these€things€happened.€€And€my€client€insist[s]€that€I€callÐ ˆØ Ðhim€as€a€witness€and€prove€when€complaints€were€made€to€policeÐ qÁ Ðdispatcher.€€And€I€am€not€going€to€do€it€because€it€just€wouldnððt€„€„Ð Zª Ðit€would€just€help€incriminate€him.€€And€I€donððt€know€if€you€want€to,Ð C“ Ðdo€you€think€we€may€have€to€put€him€on€the€record€and€air€this€out€orÐ ,| Ðnot?€€Maybe€we€should.€€But€I€am€not€going€to€call€the€man€justÐ e Ðbecause€he€wants€me€to.€€I€think€it€is€not€„€„€ÐþN` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àTHE€COURT:€€Do€you€think€it€will€hurt€his€case?ÐÐ!  ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà ` à[TRIAL€COUNSEL]:€€I€think€definitely€it€will€hurt€his€case.€Ð¢#ò"Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àTHE€COURT:€€We€donððt€need€to€put€it€on€the€record,€I€mean,€exceptÐ t%Ä $ Ðwhat€we€are€doing€right€now€unless€you€want€to.€€I€certainlyÐ ]&­!% Ðunderstand€you€know,€youððve€been€trying€cases€for€twenty€years,€andÐ F'–"& Ðyou€know€when€you€ought€to€try€to€help€somebody.€€SometimesÐ /(#' Ðpeople€donððt€understand€that€you€are€trying€to€help€them€as€best€youÐ )h$( Ðcan.€Ð*Q%)` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à.€.€.€.€ÐÓ+#'+` x` x Їà8  àà8` Ð Ð àTHE€COURT:€€Well,€just€for€the€basis€of€this€record,€the€Court€isÐ ° Ðgoing€to€rule€that€it€is€not€necessary€that€you€call€the€witness€that€youÐ ™é Ðthink€would€be€detrimental€to€your€client€even€though€he€thinks€heÐ ‚Ò Ðshould€be€called.€€I€think€youððre€looking€out€for€his€best€interest.€€AndÐ k» Ðyou€stated€on€the€record€that€from€what€you€tell€me€is€true,€and€IððmÐ T¤ Ðsure€you€checked€it,€that€it€wouldnððt€do€anything€but€put€in€the€juryððsÐ =  Ðmind€a€second€time€the€times€that€these€arrest€[sic]€occurred.€€ItÐ & v Ðwould€certainly€seem€to€this€Court€that€it€would€be€to€the€defendant,Ð  _ Ðso.€Ðø H` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à[PROSECUTOR]:€€Along€that€line,€your€Honor,€if€it€would€help€out,Ð Ê   Ðwe€can€make€an€exhibit€that€will€not€go€to€the€jury,€obviously,€of€theÐ ³  Ðrecord€that€I€have€which€basically€substantiate[s]€what€[trial€counsel]Ð œì  Ðis€saying.€€The€times€falling€exactly€with€ours,€with€what€ourÐ …Õ  Ðwitnesses€have€said.€€Ðn¾ ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àTHE€COURT:€€Do€you€want€to€do€that,€[trial€counsel]?€Ð@` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à[TRIAL€COUNSEL]:€€Yes,€I€would€like€to€have€that€as€an€exhibit.Ðb` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àTHE€COURT:€€Letððs€make€that€part€of€the€record€and€you€can€tellÐ ä4 Ðyour€client€weððll€do€that€and€it€can€go€up€on€appeal.€ÐÍ` x` x ÐÌà  àThis€dispatch€transcript,€which€was€introduced€as€an€exhibit€to€the€post„conviction€hearing,Ð Ÿï Ðdescribes€Ms.€Voylesððs€attacker€as€a€male€black€in€his€teens€or€early€twenties,€wearing€a€dark€grayÐ ˆØ Ðhooded€sweatshirt€and€blue€jeans€and€armed€with€a€pistol€of€unknown€caliber,€and€Ms.€HannaððsÐ qÁ Ðattacker€as€a€male€black€wearing€a€dark„colored€hooded€sweatshirt€and€armed€with€a€gun.€€DespiteÐ Zª Ðthe€post„conviction€courtððs€observation€that€the€photograph€taken€of€the€petitioner€at€the€time€of€hisÐ C“ Ðarrest€shows€he€was€dressed€in€similar€clothing,׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€the€petitioner€repeatedly€cited€the€differencesÐ ,| Ðbetween€the€descriptions€of€the€perpetrator€and€his€appearance€as€evidence€that€would€have€provedÐ e Ðhis€innocence.€€He€also€cited€the€above„quoted€interaction€as€evidence€that€the€trial€judge,€theÐ þN Ðprosecutor,€and€trial€counsel€conspired€to€prevent€the€evidence€from€going€to€the€jury.€€Ð ç 7 ÐÌà  àThe€petitioner€testified€he€and€trial€counsel€discussed€the€events€of€April€5,€1994,€and€heÐ ¹" ! Ðinformed€counsel€of€how€Officer€Harrell€had€ð ðset€[him]€up.ðð€€When€asked€if€trial€counsel€reviewedÐ ¢#ò" Ðwith€him€the€type€of€questions€he€would€be€asked€if€he€testified€at€trial,€the€petitioner€replied:€Ð ‹$Û# ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà " àNo.€€He€told€me,€he€basically€told€me€in€trial€that€if€I€testifiedÐ ]&­!% Ðin€my€own€defense,€that€I€was€going€to€be€found€guilty€because€basedÐ F'–"& Ðon€my€past€record.€€Thatððs€why€when€I€did€decide€to€take€the€standÐ /(#' Ðand€testify€in€my€behalf€and€told€the€jury,€I€let€them€know€that€I€didÐ )h$( Ðhave€a€past€record€but€donððt€hold€it€against€me.€€Thatððs€the€onlyÐ ° Ðreason€why€I€was€kind€of€reluctant€about€taking€the€stand€in€my€ownÐ ™é Ðdefense.€€When€he€told€me€that,€my€past€record€was€going€to€get€meÐ ‚Ò Ðconvicted,€I€believed€it.€€But€when€he€refused€to€call€that€dispatcherÐ k» Ðon€the€stand€to€assist€me,€thatððs€when€I€realized€that€I€had€to€doÐ T¤ Ðsomething€because€he€wasnððt€trying€to€do€nothing€for€me.€Ð= ` x` x ÐÌà  àThe€post„conviction€court€continued€the€evidentiary€hearing€from€September€26,€2002,€untilÐ  _ ÐOctober€29,€2002,€to€allow€the€petitioner€time€to€subpoena€witnesses€he€insisted€were€necessary€toÐ ø H Ðprove€his€allegations.€€At€the€October€date,€the€assistant€district€attorney€who€prosecuted€the€caseÐ á 1  Ðtestified€he€provided€open€file€discovery€to€trial€counsel.€€He€said€he€would€have€liked€for€the€juryÐ Ê   Ðto€have€seen€the€dispatch€transcript,€but€did€not€seek€to€have€it€introduced€as€a€trial€exhibit€becauseÐ ³  Ðhe€thought€it€was€inadmissible€hearsay.€€Antoine€Thompson€testified€the€petitionerððs€trial€counselÐ œì  Ðnever€interviewed€him€prior€to€trial,€but€acknowledged€he€testified€freely€at€trial€and€had€no€newÐ …Õ  Ðinformation€to€add.€€Sergeant€J.€D.€Simon€and€Lieutenant€Dana€Stine,€two€of€the€Memphis€policeÐ n¾  Ðofficers€involved€in€the€petitionerððs€arrest,€testified€they€turned€in€their€paperwork€in€connection€withÐ W§  Ðthe€case€and€therefore€no€longer€had€any€records€of€the€petitionerððs€arrest.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€petitioner€alsoÐ @ Ðsought€to€call€the€victim,€Ms.€Voyles,€as€a€witness€at€the€evidentiary€hearing,€stating€that€he€neededÐ )y Ðher€testimony€to€prove€she€falsely€accused€him€of€the€crime,€but€the€post„conviction€court€deniedÐ b Ðthe€request.€Ð ûK ÐÌà  àIn€its€written€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law,€the€post„conviction€court€found,€òòinterÐ Í Ðaliaóó,€that€counselððs€determinations€not€to€impeach€the€victims€with€their€preliminary€hearingÐ ¶ Ðtestimony€or€to€introduce€the€fingerprint€or€dispatch€tape€evidence€amounted€to€tactical€decisionsÐ Ÿï Ðbased€on€an€objectively€reasonable€trial€strategy;€that€counsel€was€unreasonable€for€refusing€to€assistÐ ˆØ Ðthe€petitionerððs€trial€testimony;€and€that€the€petitioner€had€failed€to€show€that€counselððs€deficiencyÐ qÁ Ðin€assisting€his€testimony€prejudiced€the€outcome€of€his€case.€€Accordingly,€the€court€denied€theÐ Zª Ðpetition€for€post„conviction€relief.€Ð C“ ÐÌà@ôô&ìàò òòòANALYSISóóó óˆÐ e ÐÌò òòòà@ìàóóI.€€Ineffective€Assistance€of€Counseló óˆÐ è 8 ÐÌò òó óà  àThe€petitioner€contends€on€appeal€that€trial€counsel€was€ineffective€for€failing€to€assist€himÐ »" ! Ðwith€his€trial€testimony,€failing€to€adequately€prepare€for€trial,€and€failing€to€effectively€cross„Ð ¤#ô" Ðexamine€witnesses.€€He€further€contends€that€the€post„conviction€court€applied€an€incorrect€standardÐ $Ý# Ðof€proof€to€the€prejudice€prong€of€the€òòStricklandóó€test,€requiring€him€to€show€clear€and€convincingÐ v%Æ $ Ðevidence,€rather€than€a€reasonable€probability,€that€counselððs€failure€to€assist€with€his€trial€testimonyÐ _&¯!% Ðaffected€the€outcome€of€his€trial.Ð H'˜"& ЀÌà@H H ìàò òA.€€Post„Conviction€Standard€of€Reviewó óˆÐ )j$( Їà  àThe€petitioner€bears€the€burden€of€proving€the€allegations€contained€in€his€post„convictionÐ ° Ðpetition€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40-30-110(f)€(2003).€€When€anÐ ™é Ðevidentiary€hearing€is€held€in€the€post-conviction€setting,€the€findings€of€fact€made€by€the€court€areÐ ‚Ò Ðconclusive€on€appeal€unless€the€evidence€preponderates€against€them.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Burnsóó,€6€S.W.3dÐ k» Ð453,€461€(Tenn.€1999);€òòTidwell€v.€Stateóó,€922€S.W.2d€497,€500€(Tenn.€1996).€€However,€review€ofÐ T¤ Ðthe€post-conviction€courtððs€application€of€the€law€to€the€facts€of€the€case€is€òòde€novoóó,€with€noÐ =  Ðpresumption€of€correctness.€€òòSeeóó€òòRuff€v.€Stateóó,€978€S.W.2d€95,€96€(Tenn.€1998).€€The€issue€ofÐ & v Ðineffective€assistance€of€counsel,€which€presents€mixed€questions€of€fact€and€law,€is€reviewed€òòdeÐ  _ Ðnovoóó,€with€a€presumption€of€correctness€given€only€to€the€post-conviction€courtððs€findings€of€fact.€Ð ø H ÐòòSeeóó€òòFields€v.€Stateóó,€40€S.W.3d€450,€458€(Tenn.€2001);€òòBurnsóó,€6€S.W.3d€at€461.Ð á 1  ÐÌà  àTo€establish€a€claim€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel,€the€petitioner€has€the€burden€toÐ ³  Ðshow€òòóóboth€that€trial€counselððs€performance€was€deficient€and€that€counselððs€deficient€performanceÐ œì  Ðprejudiced€the€outcome€of€the€proceeding.€€òòStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466€U.S.€668,€687,€104€S.€Ct.Ð …Õ  Ð2052,€2064,€80€L.€Ed.€2d€674€(1984);€òòseeóó€òòState€v.€Tayloróó,€968€S.W.2d€900,€905€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð n¾  Ð1997)€(noting€that€same€standard€for€determining€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€that€is€applied€inÐ W§  Ðfederal€cases€also€applies€in€Tennessee).€€The€òòStricklandóó€standard€is€a€two-prong€test:Ð @ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àFirst,€the€defendant€must€show€that€counselððs€performance€wasÐ b Ðdeficient.€€This€requires€showing€that€counsel€made€errors€so€seriousÐ ûK Ðthat€counsel€was€not€functioning€as€the€ð ðcounselððguaranteed€theÐ ä4 Ðdefendant€by€the€Sixth€Amendment.€€Second,€the€defendant€mustÐ Í Ðshow€that€the€deficient€performance€prejudiced€the€defense.€€ThisÐ ¶ Ðrequires€showing€that€counselððs€errors€were€so€serious€as€to€depriveÐ Ÿï Ðthe€defendant€of€a€fair€trial,€a€trial€whose€result€is€reliable.ЈØ` x` x ÐÌ466€U.S.€at€687,€104€S.€Ct.€at€2064.Ð Zª ÐÌà  àThe€deficient€performance€prong€of€the€test€is€satisfied€by€showing€that€ð ðcounselððs€acts€orÐ ,| Ðomissions€were€so€serious€as€to€fall€below€an€objective€standard€of€reasonableness€under€prevailingÐ e Ðprofessional€norms.ðð€€òòGoad€v.€Stateóó,€938€S.W.2d€363,€369€(Tenn.€1996)€(citing€òòStricklandóó,€466€U.S.Ð þN Ðat€688,€104€S.€Ct.€at€2065;€òòBaxter€v.€Roseóó,€523€S.W.2d€930,€936€(Tenn.€1975)).€€Furthermore,€Ô‡XÝGXXXÝGÔtheÐ ç 7 Ðreviewing€court€must€indulge€a€strong€presumption€that€the€conduct€of€counsel€falls€within€the€rangeÐ Ð!   Ðof€reasonable€professional€assistance,€òòseeóó€òòStricklandóó,€466€U.S.€at€690,€104€S.€Ct.€at€2066,€and€mayÐ ¹" ! Ðnot€second„guess€the€tactical€and€strategic€choices€made€by€trial€counsel€unless€those€choices€wereÐ ¢#ò" Ðuninformed€because€of€inadequate€preparation.€€òòSeeóó€òòHellard€v.€Stateóó,€629€S.W.2d€4,€9€(Tenn.€1982)Ô#†XÝGXXXÝG,‡#Ô.Ð ‹$Û# ÐThe€prejudice€prong€of€the€test€is€satisfied€by€showing€a€reasonable€probability,€i.e.,€a€ð ðprobabilityÐ t%Ä $ Ðsufficient€to€undermine€confidence€in€the€outcome,ðð€that€ð ðbut€for€counselððs€unprofessional€errors,Ð ]&­!% Ðthe€result€of€the€proceeding€would€have€been€different.ðð€€òòStricklandóó,€466€U.S.€at€694,€104€S.€Ct.€atÐ F'–"& Ð2068.€Ð /(#' ÐÌà@à à ìàò òB.€€Failure€to€Assist€Petitionerððs€TestimonyˆÐ *Q%) Ðâ âÐ ë*;&* Ðó óà  àThe€petitioner€first€indicated€his€desire€to€testify€after€both€the€State€and€the€defense€hadÐ ° Ðâ ârested€and€counsel€were€discussing€jury€instructions€with€the€court.€€Trial€counsel,€who€wasÐ ™é Ðobviously€caught€off„guard,€advised€the€petitioner€that€there€was€ð ðno€way€in€the€world€[he€could]Ð ‚Ò Ðargue€around€[the€petitionerððs]€past€record,ðð€and€the€trial€court,€additionally,€warned€the€petitionerÐ k» Ðthat€the€State€could€introduce€his€criminal€record€if€he€testified.€€When€the€petitioner€continued€toÐ T¤ Ðexpress€his€desire€to€take€the€stand,€the€trial€court€ordered€a€recess€for€counsel€to€discuss€the€issueÐ =  Ðwith€him€further.€€At€its€conclusion,€trial€counsel€informed€the€court€that€the€petitioner€remainedÐ & v Ðadamant€about€testifying:€Ð  _ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àTHE€COURT:€€You€all€need€some€more€time?Ðá 1 ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à[TRIAL€COUNSEL]:€No,€your€Honor.€€My€client€insists€onÐ ³  Ðtestifying.€€I€have€advised€him€that€if€he€does,€he€is€on€his€own.€€I€amÐ œì  Ðnot€going€to€assist€him€in€his€testimony€because€I€think€the€case€hasÐ …Õ  Ðalready€been€devastating€enough,€in€my€opinion,€and€this€is€going€toÐ n¾  Ðmake€it€even€worse.€€Heððs€been€advised,€and€we€voir€dired€him,€thatÐ W§  Ðthese€prior€convictions€of€his€can€be€used€to€impeach€his€credibility.€Ð @ ÐThe€jury€finds€out€that€he€has€convictions€for€violent€crimes,€it€isÐ )y Ðgoing€to€erase€any€doubt€they€may€have€in€this€case.€€So€with€that,Ð b Ðhaving€advised€him€that€he€shouldnððt€do€it,€and€against€my€advice,€IÐ ûK Ðam€not€going€to€assist€him€if€he€insists€on€testifying.€€Ðä4` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àTHE€COURT:€€All€right.€€Well,€of€course,€we€donððt€know€what€a€juryÐ ¶ Ðis€going€to€do.€€But€it€is€your€advice€then€that€youððre€still€advisingÐ Ÿï Ðhim€not€to€testify?ЈØ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à[TRIAL€COUNSEL]:€€Yes,€sir.€€I€have€so€advised€him.ÐZª` x` x ÐÌà  àà ` à.€.€.€.€Ð ,| ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àTHE€COURT:€€Well,€this€certainly€does€put€the€Court€in€a€dilemma.€Ð þN ÐLet€me€ask€you€„„€stand€up€again,€please,€sir.€€Do€you€understand€theÐ ç 7 Ðjeopardy€that€you€are€putting€yourself€in€by€taking€the€stand?€€YourÐ Ð!   Ðlawyer€has€advised€you€not€to€take€the€stand,€and€you€went€throughÐ ¹" ! Ðthis€one€other€time€and€said€you€didnððt€want€to€take€the€stand.€€AndÐ ¢#ò" Ðnow€youððve€changed€your€mind€and€say€you€do€want€to€take€theÐ ‹$Û# Ðstand.€€And€you€are€aware€that€several,€if€not€all,€of€these€priorÐ t%Ä $ Ðconvictions€will€be€read€into€the€record€and€could€be€detrimental€toÐ ]&­!% Ðyou€even€though€the€Court€will€charge€and€tell€the€jury€that€theyÐ F'–"& Ðshould€not€consider€them€for€any€purpose€whatsoever€as€far€as€a€guiltÐ /(#' Ðor€innocence€is€concerned.€€Have€you€understood€what€I€just€said?Ð)h$(` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àTHE€[PETITIONER]:€€Yes,€sir.€Ðê*:&*` x` x ÐÐ Ó+#'+ Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àTHE€COURT:€€And€do€you€still€want€to€take€the€stand,€do€you?а` x` x ÐÌà8  àà ` àTHE€[PETITIONER]:€€Yes,€sir.€€Ð‚ÒÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àThereafter,€the€petitioner€took€the€stand,€informed€the€jury€he€had€a€record,€and€began€toÐ T¤ Ðrecite€the€details€of€his€second€degree€murder€conviction,€stating€it€occurred€when€he€was€a€juvenileÐ =  Ðand€in€the€company€of€another€man€who€committed€the€crime.€€In€the€midst€of€his€recital,€theÐ & v Ðfollowing€transpired:€Ð  _ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à[PROSECUTOR]:€€Objection,€your€Honor.€€I€would€object€to€theÐ á 1  Ðstatement€being€given.€€I€would€ask€that€this€be€in€question€andÐ Ê   Ðanswer€form.г ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àTHE€COURT:€€All€right,€sir,€that€is€sustained.€€Youððll€have€to€goÐ …Õ  Ðahead€and€give€a€statement,€please,€sir,€and€not€ramble.€€Do€you€wantÐ n¾  Ðto€try€and€examine€him,€[trial€counsel]?ÐW§ ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à[TRIAL€COUNSEL]:€€Can€we€approach?Ð)y` x` x ÐÌà8  àà ` àTHE€COURT:€€Yes,€sir.ÐûKÐ Ð  ÐÌà  àAt€the€bench€hearing,€trial€counsel€explained€his€reasons€for€not€participating€in€theÐ Í Ðpetitionerððs€testimony€by€questioning€him:Ð ¶ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à[TRIAL€COUNSEL]:€€I€donððt€have€any€idea€what€is€he€[sic]€going€toÐ ˆØ Ðsay.€€I€mean,€I€know€what€to€ask€him.€€And,€again,€it€is€totallyÐ qÁ Ðcontrary€to€my€advice€for€him€to€even€be€sitting€there.€€And€I€justÐ Zª Ðdonððt€feel€that€I€can€assist€him.ÐC“` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà " àI€mean,€if€he€wants€to€make€a€statement,€if€he€says€somethingÐ ,| Ðthat€is€objectionable,€[the€prosecutor]€is€going€to€object€and€the€juryÐ e Ðcan€be€instructed€to€disregard€it.ÐþN` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àTHE€COURT:€€That€is€going€to€be€difficult€to€get€him€into€a€questionÐ Ð!   Ðand€answer.€€He€doesnððt€know€how€to€do€that.€Ð¹" !` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à[TRIAL€COUNSEL]:€€I€just€canððt€help€him.€€Iððm€not€going€to€helpÐ ‹$Û# Ðhim.òòóóÐt%Ä $` x` x ÐÌà  àThe€petitioner€contends€counselððs€refusal€to€participate€in€his€testimony€constituted€aÐ F'–"& Ðdeficiency€in€representation€which€prejudiced€the€outcome€of€his€case.€€Specifically,€he€argues€that,Ð /(#' Ðbecause€he€ð ðwas€not€prepared€for€and€aided€in€his€presentation€of€proof,€he€went€into€several€areasÐ )h$( Ðthat€were€not€relevant€to€the€case,€and€actually€prejudicial€to€the€defense€theory.ðð€€As€an€example,Ð *Q%) Ðâ âhe€cites€his€testimony€about€ð ðseveral€old€convictions,ðð€which€he€asserts€would€not€have€beenÐ ê*:&* Ðadmissible€to€impeach€his€testimony.€€With€respect€to€this€claim,€the€post„conviction€court€concludedÐ ° Ðas€follows:Ð ™é Ðâ âÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà " àTrial€counselððs€failure€to€assist€the€Petitioner€during€testimonyÐ k» Ðdoes€[not]€fall€to€the€level€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel.€€UnderÐ T¤ Ðthe€circumstances,€it€was€unreasonable€for€counsel€not€to€assist€hisÐ =  Ðclientððs€decision,€albeit€late€and€unforeseen,€to€testify.€€HoweverÐ & v Ðdeficient€trial€counselððs€performance€was,€it€did€not€however,Ð  _ Ðprejudice€the€Petitionerððs€case.€€According€to€the€transcripts,€theÐ ø H ÐPetitioner€did€not€prove€beyond€clear€and€convincing€evidence€thatÐ á 1  Ð[trial€counselððs]€performance€denied€the€[petitioner]€a€fair€trial.€€ÐÊ  ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà " àFurthermore,€the€Petitioner€was€allowed€to€testify€more,€withoutÐ œì  Ðthe€help€of€[trial€counsel],€than€if€[trial€counsel]€would€have€assistedÐ …Õ  Ðhim.€€The€Petitioner€had€his€chance€to€tell€the€jury€his€side€of€theÐ n¾  Ðstory,€yet€the€jury€still€found€him€guilty.€€It€was€the€[petitionerððs]Ð W§  Ðdecision€to€testify€and€he€was€allowed€to€do€so.€€Petitioner€has€failedÐ @ Ðto€prove€both€prongs€of€òòStricklandóó.Ð)y` x` x ÐÌà  àInitially,€we€disagree€with€the€petitionerððs€claim€that€the€post„conviction€court€applied€anÐ ûK Ðincorrect€standard€of€proof€in€utilizing€the€prejudice€prong€of€the€òòStricklandóó€test.€€Despite€the€Ð ä4 Ðlanguage€the€court€used€in€the€portion€of€its€order€quoted€above,€elsewhere€in€the€order€it€correctlyÐ Í Ðstated€that€the€post„conviction€petitioner€bears€the€burden€of€proving€ð ðthe€òòallegations€of€fact€óóin€hisÐ ¶ Ðpetition€by€òòóóclear€and€convincing€evidenceðð€(emphasis€added).€€Furthermore,€it€correctly€stated€thatÐ Ÿï Ða€petitioner€who€alleges€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€bears€the€burden€of€showing€that€counselððsÐ ˆØ Ðperformance€fell€below€an€objective€standard€of€reasonableness€and€that€ð ðthere€is€òòa€reasonableÐ qÁ Ðprobability€óóthat,€but€for€counselððs€unprofessional€errors,€the€result€of€the€proceeding€would€haveÐ Zª Ðbeen€differentðð€(emphasis€added€and€internal€quotations€omitted).€Ð C“ ÐÌà  àòòóóThe€petitionerððs€direct€testimony€covers€more€than€twenty„three€pages€of€the€trial€transcriptÐ e Ðand€was€little€encumbered€by€the€laws€of€evidence.€€During€his€testimony,€the€petitioner€vehementlyÐ þN Ðdenied€his€involvement€in€the€crime,€explained€his€whereabouts€and€actions€on€the€night€in€question,Ð ç 7 Ðand€offered€his€version€of€the€facts€underlying€his€prior€convictions€for€second€degree€murder€andÐ Ð!   Ðpossession€of€cocaine€with€the€intent€to€sell.€€Although€he€asserts€on€appeal€that€the€prior€convictionsÐ ¹" ! Ðhe€brought€up€would€not€have€been€admissible€to€impeach€his€credibility,€the€record€clearly€reflectsÐ ¢#ò" Ðthat€the€trial€court€had€ruled€the€murder€and€drug€convictions€admissible€for€impeachment€purposesÐ ‹$Û# Ðand€that€the€petitioner€was€aware€of€that€fact€before€he€began€his€testimony.€€Therefore,€trialÐ t%Ä $ Ðcounselððs€assistance€with€the€testimony€would€not€have€prevented€the€damaging€information€aboutÐ ]&­!% Ðthe€prior€convictions€from€reaching€the€jury.€€Moreover,€the€State€had€a€compelling€case€evenÐ F'–"& Ðwithout€evidence€of€the€prior€convictions,€presenting€proof€that€the€petitioner€was€arrested€in€theÐ /(#' Ðarea€shortly€after€the€report€of€the€crimes,€essentially€matched€the€descriptions€of€the€attacker,€andÐ )h$( Ðwas€identified€by€each€victim€as€her€assailant.€€Ð *Q%) Ðâ âÐ ê*:&* Ðà  àAdditionally,€by€the€timing€of€his€demand€to€testify,€the€petitioner€put€trial€counsel€in€anÐ ° Ðâ âuntenable€position.€€Because€of€the€petitionerððs€previous€and€continuing€decision€not€to€testify,Ð ™é Ðcounsel€had€not€prepared€him€for€direct€or€cross„examination.€€The€nature€of€the€charges€and€proofÐ ‚Ò Ðagainst€the€petitioner€would€have€required€counsel€to€spend€a€substantial€amount€of€time€preparingÐ k» Ðthe€petitionerððs€testimony.€€It€is€clear€from€his€unaided€trial€testimony€that€the€petitioner€had€a€lotÐ T¤ Ðhe€wanted€to€say€and€would€have€been€difficult€to€restrain.€€Given€all€of€this,€and€the€fact€the€juryÐ =  Ðwas€expecting€to€hear€final€arguments€after€the€recess€rather€than€taking€a€very€lengthy€recessÐ & v Ðfollowed€by€the€petitionerððs€testimony,€we€conclude€that€the€petitionerððs€surprise€eleventh€hourÐ  _ Ðdemand€to€testify€simply€was€unreasonable.Ð ø H ÐÌà  àUnder€these€circumstances,€we€have€no€hesitation€in€concluding€that€the€petitioner€has€failedÐ Ê   Ðto€show€a€reasonable€probability€that€counselððs€failure€to€direct€his€testimony€affected€the€outcomeÐ ³  Ðof€his€trial.€Ð œì  ÐÌà  àBecause€a€failure€to€establish€either€prong€of€the€òòStricklandóó€test€results€in€a€failure€toÐ n¾  Ðestablish€the€claim,€we€need€not€consider€whether€counsel€was€deficient€for€failing€to€direct€theÐ W§  Ðpetitionerððs€testimony.€€However,€without€making€a€determination€on€this€issue,€we€note€that€counselÐ @ Ðwas€an€experienced€defense€attorney€who,€as€is€very€clear€from€the€record,€was€well€prepared€forÐ )y Ðtrial.€€We€note,€further,€that€counsel€provided€a€consistent€explanation€for€his€decision€not€to€assistÐ b Ðthe€petitioner€at€trial€and€at€the€evidentiary€hearing,€stating€that€he€had€no€idea€what€the€petitionerÐ ûK Ðwas€going€to€say€and€believed€asking€questions€would€not€have€helped€and€might€have€compoundedÐ ä4 Ðthe€damage€caused€by€the€testimony.€€It€is€hard€to€view€counselððs€failure€to€rehearse€the€testimonyÐ Í Ðor€prepare€a€list€of€questions€as€unreasonable,€given€the€petitionerððs€continual€expression€of€hisÐ ¶ Ðintent€not€to€testify.€€Although€counsel€simply€might€have€gone€to€such€fallback€questions€for€theÐ Ÿï Ðpetitioner€as€ð ðWhat€happened€next?ðð,€we€cannot€conclude€that€this€procedure€would€have€resultedÐ ˆØ Ðin€a€different€verdict.Ð qÁ ÐÌà@¾¾ìàò òB.€€Failure€to€Prepare€for€TrialˆÐ C“ ÐÌó óà  àThe€petitioner€next€contends€that€trial€counsel€failed€to€familiarize€himself€with€theÐ g Ðpreliminary€hearing€testimony,€which€rendered€him€unprepared€to€adequately€impeach€the€victimsððÐ  P Ðtrial€testimony.€€He€further€contends€that€trial€counsel€committed€several€other€errors,€including€hisÐ é 9 Ðfailure€to€introduce€the€fingerprint€or€dispatch€evidence€and€to€point€out€discrepancies€between€theÐ Ò!"  Ðdescriptions€of€the€attacker€and€his€appearance€at€the€time€of€his€arrest,€which€cumulativelyÐ »" ! Ðamounted€to€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel.Ð ¤#ô" ÐÌà  àThe€petitioner€bases€his€assertion€that€counsel€was€unfamiliar€with€the€preliminary€hearingÐ v%Æ $ Ðtranscript€on€the€following€exchange€that€occurred€during€the€petitionerððs€cross„examinationÐ _&¯!% Ðtestimony:€Ð H'˜"& ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àQ.à " àAnd€you€think€the€two€victims€in€the€courtroom€are€involved€inÐ )j$( Ðthis€racially€motivated€conspiracy?Ð*S%)` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.à " àYes,€sir.€€I€have€right€here€in€this€preliminary€hearing€ð!ð€ÐÕ+%'+` x` x Їà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà " à[TRIAL€COUNSEL]:€€I€havenððt€even€looked€at€that.€Ð°` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àA.à " à„„€my€preliminary€hearing€transcript€from€the€lady€ð!ð€Ð‚Ò` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà " à[PROSECUTOR]:€€Objection.€€I€would€„€„€this€is€hearsay.€€IÐ T¤ Ðobject€to€it.Ð= ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà " àTHE€COURT:€€That€is€sustained.€€You€canððt€mention€that,€sir,Ð  _ Ðwhat€happened.Ðø H` x` x ÐÌà  àHowever,€at€the€evidentiary€hearing,€trial€counsel€expressed€his€confidence€that€he€had,€inÐ Ê   Ðfact,€reviewed€the€preliminary€hearing€transcript€and€testified€he€did€not€know€what€he€had€meantÐ ³  Ðby€the€above€statement.€€The€post„conviction€court€accredited€trial€counselððs€testimony€on€this€issue,Ð œì  Ðfinding€that€counsel€was€fully€prepared€and€that€his€decisions€with€respect€to€the€dispatch€transcriptÐ …Õ  Ðand€fingerprint€evidence€were€based€on€sound€trial€strategy.€€The€record€does€not€preponderateÐ n¾  Ðagainst€the€post„conviction€courtððs€findings.€€Accordingly,€we€conclude€that€the€petitioner€is€notÐ W§  Ðentitled€to€post„conviction€relief€based€on€his€claim€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel.€€€Ð @ ÐÌà@4 4 ìàò òII.€€€Denial€of€Petitionerððs€Request€to€Proceed€òòPro€SeóóˆÐ b ÐÌà  àó óThe€petitioner€contends€the€post„conviction€court€violated€his€Sixth€Amendment€right€to€self„Ð æ6 Ðrepresentation,€thereby€committing€reversible€error,€by€denying€his€repeated€requests€to€representÐ Ï Ðhimself€at€the€post„conviction€proceedings.€€We€respectfully€disagree.€Ð ¸ ÐÌà  àThe€constitutional€right€to€self„representation,€afforded€by€both€the€Sixth€Amendment€of€theÐ ŠÚ ÐUnited€States€Constitution€and€Article€I,€section€9€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution,€is€not€applicableÐ sà Ðto€post-conviction€proceedings.€òòóó€òòCole€v.€Stateóó,€798€S.W.2d€261,€263€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990).€Ð \¬ ÐHowever,€a€post„conviction€petitioner€has€a€common€law€right€to€self„representation,€implicitlyÐ E• Ðestablished€by€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€Rule€13.€€òòId.óó€€This€common€law€right€is€not€fundamental,Ð .~ Ðand€a€post„conviction€court€may€therefore€appoint€counsel€to€represent€a€petitioner€if€necessary€forÐ g Ðthe€proper€administration€of€justice.€òòóó€òòCharles€William€Young€v.€Stateóó,€No.€M2002„01815„CCA„R3„Ð  P ÐPC,€2004€WL€305790,€at€*4€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€Feb.€18,€2004)€(citations€omitted).Ð é 9 ÐÌà  àThe€record€reveals€that€the€petitioner€initially€sought€substitution€of€counsel€rather€than€theÐ »" ! Ðright€to€proceed€òòpro€seóó,€stating€at€an€August€15,€2002,€hearing€that€his€appointed€counsel€was€notÐ ¤#ô" Ðincluding€all€the€claims€he€wanted€raised€and€that€he€therefore€wanted€ð ðsomeone€who€[was]€moreÐ $Ý# Ðconcerned€about€[his]€situation.ðð€€The€post„conviction€court€denied€the€petitionerððs€request€forÐ v%Æ $ Ðsubstitute€counsel€but€granted€his€subsequent€request€to€represent€himself.€€However,€on€August€26,Ð _&¯!% Ð2002,€the€post„conviction€court€reversed€itself,€explaining€to€the€petitioner€that€it€was€going€toÐ H'˜"& Ðrequire€post„conviction€counsel€to€continue€to€represent€him€but€would€also€allow€the€petitioner€toÐ 1(#' Ðpresent€the€claims€he€wanted€raised.€€The€petitioner€protested€and,€in€so€doing,€revealed€that€his€realÐ )j$( Ðdesire€continued€to€be€for€the€substitution€of€counsel€and/or€a€delay€in€the€proceedings,€rather€thanÐ *S%) Ðthe€right€to€self„representation:Ð ì*<&* ÐÐ Õ+%'+ Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à[THE€PETITIONER]:€€But€I€canððt€do€it€„„€I€canððt€represent€myself.€Ð ° ÐI€mean,€I€donððt€want€this€„„€I€donððt€trust,€first€of€all,€[trial€court],€andÐ ™é Ðð!ð€Ð‚Ò` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àTHE€COURT:€€Youððll€have€the€opportunity€to€present€whatever€otherÐ T¤ Ðissues€you€have.€€[Post„conviction€counsel]€Iððm€sure€will€cover€thatÐ =  Ðprocedure€with€you.Ð& v` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à[THE€PETITIONER]:€€And€his€amended€petition€is€incomplete.Ðø H` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àTHE€COURT:€€As€I€said,€you€will€have€the€right€to€present€any€otherÐ Ê   Ðissues€that€you€„„€that€are€relevant€to€this€matter.€€And€[post„Ð ³  Ðconviction€counsel]€will€cover€the€procedure€for€doing€so€with€you,Ð œì  Ðbut€we€will€proceed€on€the€date€that€Iððve€given.€€You€will€have€fromÐ …Õ  Ðnow€„„€if€there€are€any€additional€things€you€want€to€bring€with€you,Ð n¾  Ðyou€have€from€now€until€the€date€that€weððve€given€to€have€thoseÐ W§  Ðmatters€here€and€weððll€proceed.Ð@` x` x ÐÌà  àAt€the€evidentiary€hearing,€the€post„conviction€court€allowed€the€petitioner€to€raise€the€claimsÐ b Ðhis€counsel€had€deemed€to€be€without€merit,€to€make€his€own€assertions€and€argument,€and,€with€theÐ ûK Ðexception€of€the€victim,€to€call€the€witnesses€he€asserted€were€essential€to€prove€his€allegations.€Ð ä4 ÐThus,€we€agree€with€the€State€that€there€were€no€claims€or€evidence€that€the€petitioner€was€preventedÐ Í Ðfrom€raising€by€the€post„conviction€courtððs€denial€of€his€requests€to€represent€himself.€€We,Ð ¶ Ðtherefore,€conclude€that€this€issue€is€without€merit.Ð Ÿï ÐÌÐ  qÁ Ðà@GG%ìàò òòòCONCLUSIONóóó óˆÐ ° ÐÌà  àBased€on€the€foregoing€authorities€and€reasoning,€we€affirm€the€denial€of€the€petition€forÐ ƒÓ Ðpost„conviction€relief.€Ð l¼ ÐÌÌà  àà ` àà " àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð ' w Ðà  àà ` àà " àà  àà h àà À àà  àALAN€E.€GLENN,€JUDGE