ÿWPCÝ ’x€]*>W(¸‹–oÝ”CO)¤~¨c¨ûg›žuj¬D2òѽાv>99xh^Þ”îà gæÞíH‚bÉòw>^·‘#ÿî2 òèæ›‡ÿ„ò͹ÓÃ'y„;@YÆäÑ96òÍò#_1’À’G=ƒ÷è§­í#ßpTÔ*—QòD„¿p•|/]Õç¿ÿA®t'ycžZ=¯üL¾ðý A–K&л=èëîû:,)XMÒDÚñyt®·Ä“= 0ímžè~¦"Ó•ÚF’§0`¹ñ‘GšhYñ@®o¼S¼˜a„ñZúOMgÇ¡—ß”²>¸W05&VÙã4šsãüŒoU+áá/ºÊ‚Urd aÅÁ9X¸ÁtS°öÓ¸´›óP¶’ÐR±ï¨h…1åKdÞÁú­°Võ5P½…f«Kdu¦f)y¸Ž’×ôáfÙ°ºo`ѳ±¨pZylx3(cŽìq+#kýï;ã¡çügÄòv}¥@?ËR JKè6f UUr‰ðå£÷(:%n¢n®£ŒÞfL®?!74gûΈJw*v_«3[*u‚ÑŠ5Öçîcs—F¤?‹]&©&oþì8*!)²F$+­§Ú&' ?°ÀeÑ ]xlÇbN\ %^ 0ˆdU$Nì z:Ò´^ † z’ Ò wÞ 4â ö  Æ ÆÍ Æ“ ÆY mN6#Á8U @ùE9;KC 0DŽŽŽŽŽŽŽŽŽŽŽŽŽŽŽŽŽŽŽŽŽbÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒÒ 0ëÚÚÚÚ BÅÅ 0¤â D3† D-¹ 0Kææ AS1Æ„ 0¤J 0Dî A«2»(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular˜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™5)  ˜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.wptÖJ~'bk2ˆ1¥3|x Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5ÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ˜HP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL 6ÈÈÈÈÈÈÈÈ0(ÖÃ9 Z‹(Times New Roman   AÝ ƒR $ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôwœò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔThese€facts€were€taken€from€the€Stateððs€version€of€events€at€the€petitionerððs€plea€hearing.€€The€petitionerÐ ° Ðclaims€that€he€did€not€attempt€to€sell€cocaine€to€the€police.(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó- ù-(|G2 $¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€8»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôwœò»»Ô d(|3e$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€8»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3e$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€8»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€8»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼8»»»ÔÑ8€”XXdæ»»d8ÑÓÓà@ttìàÔ‡î-›î»¼8ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@kk$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼8»îî-›#ԈРð@ ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àMay€2000€SessionÐ 0 € ÐÔ‡X”X»¼8ÔÌò òÔ#†¼8»XX” #ÔANTHONY€EWINGòòóó€v.€STATE€OF€TENNESSEEÔ‡X”X»¼8Ôó óÐ  h ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€as€of€Right€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Davidson€CountyÐ P  Ðà@@øøìàNo.€97B„1230€€€€€€Steve€R.€Dozier,€JudgeÐ Ì ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E</` AßÐ 0€ ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M1999„01079„CCA„R3„PC€„€Filed€September€20,€Ô_Ô2000Ô_ÔÐ j ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<±` AßÐ ² Ðó óÌÓ  ÓOn€February€12,€1998,€the€petitioner,€Anthony€Ewing,€entered€a€best€interest€guilty€plea€in€theÐ œì  ÐDavidson€County€Criminal€Court€to€one€count€of€attempt€to€sell€over€.5€grams€of€cocaine,€a€classÐ h!¸" ÐC€felony.€€The€trial€court€imposed€a€sentence€of€six€years€incarceration€in€the€Davidson€CountyÐ 4#„$ ÐWorkhouse.€€The€trial€court€further€ordered€this€sentence€to€be€served€concurrently€with€sentencesÐ %P & Ðthe€petitioner€was€already€serving.€€The€petitioner€filed€a€post„conviction€petition€for€relief,€allegingÐ Ì&"( Ðthat€he€received€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€and€that€his€best€interest€guilty€plea€was€not€madeÐ ˜(è#* Ðknowingly€or€voluntarily.€€The€post„conviction€court€denied€the€petition,€finding€that€the€petitionerÐ d*´%, Ðhad€received€effective€assistance€of€counsel€and€that€the€best€interest€guilty€plea€had€been€madeÐ 0,€'.ý ÐÔ_Ôknowingly€and€voluntarily.€€The€petitioner€now€appeals€the€denial€of€his€petition€for€post„convictionÐ ° Ðrelief.€€Pursuant€to€a€review€of€the€record€and€the€partiesðð€briefs,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€post„Ð |Ì Ðconviction€court.Ô#†¼8»XX”#ÔÔ‡X”X»¼8ÔÐ H˜ ÐÓÀÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€is€Affirmed.ó óÐ à 0 ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼8»àX”Ë #ÔÔ‡X”X.¼8ÔNorma€McGee€Ogle,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòGary€R.€Wade,€P.J.,óó€andÐ xÈ  ÐòòDavid€G.€Hayesóó,€J.,€joined.Ð D”  ÐÌDwight€E.€Scott,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€Richard€Piliponis,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,Ð Ü, ÐAnthony€Ewing.Ð ¨ø ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter,€Lucian€D.€Geise,€Assistant€Attorney€General,€andÐ @ ÐKymberly€Haas,€Assistant€District€Attorney€General,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð  \ ÐÓ ÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼8»XX”° #ÔÔ‡X”X»¼8ÔÐ ¤ô ÐòòóóÔ#†¼8»XX”O #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€X”X»¼8Ôà@'' ìàò òòòI.€Factual€Backgroundóóó óˆÐ p!À  Ðà  àà ` àOn€the€evening€of€June€8,€1996,€undercover€police€officer€Jesse€Birchwell€and€aÐ <#Œ" Ðcooperating€individual€approached€the€petitioner€for€the€purpose€of€buying€cocaine.€€The€petitionerÐ %X $ Ðand€the€officer€agreed€upon€a€price€of€two€hundred€and€fifty€dollars€for€the€cocaine.€€The€petitionerÐ Ô&$"& Ðtold€the€officer€that€he€had€to€leave€to€get€the€cocaine€and€that€he€would€return€in€five€minutes.€Ð  (ð#( ÐPolice€executed€a€warrant€authorizing€a€search€of€the€premises€before€the€petitioner€could€return€andÐ l*¼%* Ðdeliver€cocaine€to€the€officer.€€A€search€of€the€residence€revealed€a€large€quantity€of€what€appearedÐ 8,ˆ', Ðto€be€cocaine.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€The€petitioner€was€charged€with€attempt€to€sell€over€.5€grams€of€a€substanceÐ ° Ðcontaining€cocaine,€attempt€to€deliver€over€.5€grams€of€a€substance€containing€cocaine,€possessionÐ |Ì Ðwith€intent€to€sell€over€.5€grams€of€a€substance€containing€cocaine,€and€possession€of€drugÐ H˜ Ðparaphernalia€with€intent€to€use.€€Ð  d ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€petitioner,€represented€by€counsel,€entered€a€best€interest€guilty€plea€to€one€countÐ ¬ ü  Ðof€attempt€to€sell€over€.5€grams€of€cocaine.€€Pursuant€to€the€plea€agreement,€the€petitioner€wasÐ xÈ  Ðsentenced€to€six€years€incarceration€in€the€Davidson€County€Workhouse€as€a€Range€I€offender€withÐ D”  Ðthirty€percent€release€eligibility.€€The€trial€court€further€ordered€that€this€sentence€be€servedÐ ` Ðconcurrently€with€sentences€the€petitioner€was€already€serving€for€previous€convictions.€€The€StateÐ Ü, Ðagreed€to€dismiss€the€additional€charges€against€the€petitioner.€The€petitioner€filed€a€petition€for€post„Ð ¨ø Ðconviction€relief€alleging€that€he€had€been€denied€effective€assistance€of€counsel€prior€to€enteringÐ tÄ Ðhis€guilty€plea€and€that€his€best€interest€guilty€plea€was€not€made€knowingly€and€voluntarily.€€TheÐ @ Ðtrial€court€denied€the€petitionerððs€petition€for€post„conviction€relief.€Ð  \ ÐÌà@$ìàòòò òII.€Analysisó óóóˆÐ ¤ô Ðà  àà ` àBecause€the€petitionerððs€post„conviction€proceedings€were€initiated€after€May€10,Ð p!À  Ð1995,€the€petitioner€must€prove€all€factual€allegations€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence.€€Tenn.€CodeÐ <#Œ" ÐAnn.€ðð€40„30„210(f)(1997);€òòHicks€v.€Stateóó,€983€S.W.2d€240,€245€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1998).€€WhenÐ %X $ Ðthere€is€no€serious€or€substantial€doubt€about€the€accuracy€of€the€conclusions€drawn€from€theÐ Ô&$"& Ðevidence,€that€evidence€can€be€said€to€be€clear€and€convincing.€€òòId.óó€€On€appeal,€this€court€is€boundÐ  (ð#( Ðby€the€factual€findings€of€the€post„conviction€court€unless€the€evidence€preponderates€otherwise.€Ð ° ÐòòButler€v.€Stateóó,€789€S.W.2d€898,€899€(Tenn.€1990).€€The€post„conviction€court€must€solve€allÐ |Ì Ðquestions€concerning€witness€credibility€and€the€weight€and€value€to€be€accorded€to€their€testimony.€Ð H˜ ÐòòBlack€v.€Stateóó,€794€S.W.2d€752,€755€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990).€€Moreover,€the€findings€made€by€theÐ  d Ðtrial€court€at€an€oral€hearing,€after€observing€witnesses€testify€and€considering€conflicting€testimony,Ð à 0 Ðwill€be€given€the€weight€of€a€jury€verdict.€€òòBratton€v.€Stateóó,€477€S.W.2d€754,€756€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð ¬ ü  Ð1971).€€Accordingly,€an€appellate€court€may€not€re„weigh€or€reevaluate€the€evidence€or€substituteÐ xÈ  Ðits€inferences€for€those€of€the€post„conviction€court.€€òòWilliams€v.€Stateóó,€No.€03C01„9801„CC„00013,Ð D”  Ð1999€WL€58608,€at€*2€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Knoxville,€February€9,€1999).Ð ` ÐÌà@22ìàA.€Ineffective€Assistance€of€CounselˆÐ ¨ø Ðà  àà ` àThe€petitioner€argues€that€he€received€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€prior€toÐ tÄ Ðentering€a€plea€of€guilty.€€He€claims€that€his€trial€counsel€failed€to€interview€all€available€witnessesÐ @ Ðand€to€pursue€available€avenues€of€defense.€€The€petitioner€also€alleges€that€his€trial€counsel€did€notÐ  \ Ðkeep€him€informed€about€the€status€of€his€case€and€did€not€explain€the€consequences€of€a€best€interestÐ Ø( Ðguilty€plea.Ð ¤ô ÐÌà  àà ` àThis€court€reviews€cases€involving€mixed€questions€of€law€and€fact,€such€as€claimsÐ <#Œ" Ðof€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel,€de€novo.€€òòState€v.€Burnsóó,€6€S.W.3d€453,€461€(Tenn.€1999).€€Ô‡X”XXX”ÔToÐ %X $ Ðprove€a€claim€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel,€the€petitioner€must€demonstrate€that€counsel'sÐ Ô&$"& Ðperformance€was€deficient€and€that€the€deficiency€prejudiced€the€petitioner€by€creating€a€reasonableÐ  (ð#( Ðprobability€that€the€result€of€the€trial€is€unreliable€or€the€proceedings€were€fundamentally€unfair.€Ð l*¼%* ÐòòStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466€U.S.€668,€687,€104€S.Ct.€2052,€2064€(1984).Ô#†X”XXX”*!#ÔÔ‡X”XXX”Ô€€In€order€to€determineÐ 8,ˆ', ÐÔ#†X”XXX”<##ÔÔ‡X”XXX”Ôwhether€or€not€counselððs€performance€was€deficientÔ#†X”XXX”ª##ÔÔ‡X”XXX”Ô,€this€court€must€decide€whether€counselððsÐ ° Ðperformance€was€within€the€range€of€competence€required€of€attorneys€in€criminal€casesÔ#†X”XXX”!$#ÔÔ‡X”XXX”Ô.€€òòBaxter€v.Ô#†X”XXX”û$#ÔÔ‡X”XXX”ÔÐ |Ì ÐRoseóó,€523€S.W.2d€930€(Ô#†X”XXX”L%#ÔÔ‡X”XXX”ÔTenn.€1975).Ô#†X”XXX”¼%#ÔÔ‡X”XXX”Ô€€Moreover,€when€a€petitioner€alleges€that€ineffective€assistanceÐ H˜ Ðof€counselÔ#†X”XXX” &#Ô€Ô‡X”XXX”Ôresulted€in€a€guilty€plea,€the€petitioner€must€prove€that,€but€for€counsel's€errors,Ô#†X”XXX”­&#ÔÔ‡X”XXX”Ô€he€wouldÐ  d Ðnot€have€pled€guilty€and€would€have€insisted€upon€going€to€trialÔ#†X”XXX”C'#ÔÔ‡X”XXX”Ô.€€€òòHill€v.€Lockhartóó,€474€U.S.€52,€59,Ð à 0 Ð106€S.Ct.€366,€370€(1985);€òòseeóó€òòHenderson€v.€Stateóó,Ô#†X”XXX”ã'#ÔÔ‡X”XXX”Ô€No.€02C01-9610-CR-00376,€Ô#†X”XXX”¤(#ÔÔ‡X”XXX”Ô1997€WL€566053,Ð ¬ ü  Ðat€*5€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Jackson,€September€12,1997).Ô#†X”XXX”)#Ôà p àÐ xÈ  ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€petitioner€alleges€that€ð ðhad€Mr.€Pilliponis€(sic)€adequately€investigated€the€caseÐ ` Ðand€adequately€assessed€the€Stateððs€evidence€against€the€[petitioner],€there€is€a€reasonable€probabilityÐ Ü, Ðthat€the€outcome€of€the€proceedings€would€have€been€different.ðð€€However,€the€proof€presented€atÐ ¨ø Ðthe€post„conviction€hearing€demonstrated€that€trial€counsel€interviewed€at€least€two€police€officersÐ tÄ Ðinvolved€in€the€arrest€of€the€petitioner€and€had€numerous€conversations€with€the€Assistant€DistrictÐ @ ÐAttorney€about€the€Stateððs€case€against€the€petitioner.€Additionally,€trial€counsel€reviewed€the€StateððsÐ  \ Ðdiscovery€file.€€Trial€counsel€also€testified€that€he€had€several€lengthy€conversations€with€theÐ Ø( Ðpetitioner€about€possible€defenses€that€could€be€raised€at€trial€and€about€the€petitionerððs€constitutionalÐ ¤ô Ðrights.€€Although€trial€counsel€knew€that€the€petitioner€maintained€his€innocence,€he€believed€thatÐ p!À  Ðin€order€to€rebut€the€Stateððs€evidence,€the€petitioner€would€have€to€testify.€€The€petitioner€did€notÐ <#Œ" Ðwant€to€testify€because€of€his€extensive€criminal€record€and€because€he€had€previously€madeÐ %X $ Ðcontrolled€buys€for€the€police.€€Trial€counsel€stated€that€in€his€opinion€the€petitioner€had€understoodÐ Ô&$"& Ðtheir€conversations€and€had€agreed€to€plead€guilty.Ð  (ð#( Ðâ âÐ l*¼%* Ðà  àà ` àThe€petitioner€also€claims€that€his€trial€counsel€knew€of€a€State€lab€report€revealingÐ ° Ðâ âthat€the€white€substance€the€police€confiscated€from€the€residence€was€.1€gram€of€cocaine€mixed€withÐ |Ì Ð153.7€grams€of€some€other€white€substance;€therefore€the€petitionerððs€trial€counsel€should€haveÐ H˜ Ðknown€that€the€State€could€not€prove€that€the€petitioner€was€guilty€of€attempt€to€sell€more€than€.5Ð  d Ðgrams€of€cocaine.€€However,€the€petitioner€overlooks€the€fact€that€he€was€charged€with€attempt€toÐ à 0 Ðsell€.5€grams€or€more€of€òòa€substance€containing€cocaineóó,€a€class€C€felony.€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€39„Ð ¬ ü  Ð17„417(c)(1),€39„12„101,€„107(a)(1997)(emphasis€added).€€This€court€has€found€that€a€ð ðsubstanceÐ xÈ  Ðcontaining€cocaineðð€would€include€the€weight€of€any€ð ðcutting€agent€or€medium€along€with€theÐ D”  Ðweight€of€the€scheduled€substance.ðð€€òòState€v.€Alcornóó,€741€S.W.2d€135,€138€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987).€Ð ` ÐFurthermore,€there€were€several€police€officers€involved€in€the€undercover€drug€buy€who€wereÐ Ü, Ðavailable€to€testify€against€the€petitioner.€€The€State€could€have€proven€with€the€lab€reports€andÐ ¨ø Ðpolice€testimony€that€the€petitioner€had€attempted€to€sell€more€than€.5€grams€of€a€substanceÐ tÄ Ðcontaining€cocaine.€€Moreover,€had€the€petitioner€not€pled€guilty,€the€State€had€three€additionalÐ @ Ðfelony€drug€charges€against€the€petitioner€of€which€the€petitioner€ran€the€risk€of€being€convicted€atÐ  \ Ðtrial.€à  àÐ Ø( Ðà  àà ` àThe€petitioner€also€claims€that€because€his€co„defendant,€Edward€Jones,€confessedÐ ¤ô Ðto€the€crimes€and€stated€that€the€petitioner€had€nothing€to€do€with€the€sale€of€cocaine,€his€trial€counselÐ p!À  Ðshould€have€interviewed€Jones€and€pursued€that€line€of€defense.€€Trial€counsel€testified€at€the€post„Ð <#Œ" Ðconviction€hearing€that€he€did€not€pursue€Jones€as€a€defense€witness€because€he€believed€that€Mr.Ð %X $ ÐJonesðð€past€criminal€history€made€him€an€unreliable€witness.€€òòSeeóó€òòBell€v.€Stateóó,€No.€03C01„9210„CR„Ð Ô&$"& Ð00364,€1995€WL€113420,€at€*16€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Knoxville,€March€15,€1995)(failing€to€pursueÐ  (ð#( Ða€witness€of€dubious€credibility€was€not€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel).€€Trial€counsel€determinedÐ l*¼%* Ðthat,€in€light€of€the€Stateððs€evidence€against€the€petitioner,€which€included€audio€tapes€implicatingÐ 8,ˆ', Ðthe€petitioner,€it€was€unlikely€that€an€uncorroborated€statement€by€a€co„defendant€would€haveÐ ° Ðexonerated€the€petitioner€of€guilt.€€This€court€does€not€use€hindsight€to€second„guess€or€criticize€trialÐ |Ì Ðcounselððs€strategy€or€tactics.€€òòTurner€v.€Stateóó,€No.€02C01„9310„CR„00236,€1994€WL€456337,€at€*2Ð H˜ Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Jackson,€August€24,€1994).Ð  d ÐÌà  àà ` àMoreover,€due€to€the€petitionerððs€previous€criminal€history,€he€qualified€as€a€RangeÐ ¬ ü  ÐII€offender.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„106(1997).€€The€sentence€for€a€Range€II€offender€guilty€ofÐ xÈ  Ða€class€C€felony,€such€as€attempt€to€sell€more€than€.5€grams€of€cocaine,€is€six€to€ten€yearsÐ D”  Ðincarceration€with€thirty„five€percent€eligibility.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„112(b)(3),„501(d)(1997).€Ð ` ÐPursuant€to€the€petitionerððs€plea€bargain,€the€trial€court€sentenced€the€petitioner€to€six€yearsÐ Ü, Ðincarceration€in€the€Davidson€County€Workhouse€as€a€Range€I€offender€with€thirty€percent€releaseÐ ¨ø Ðeligibility.€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„35„112(a)(3),„501(c).€€Furthermore,€the€State€dropped€theÐ tÄ Ðremaining€felony€charges€against€the€petitioner.€The€petitionerððs€trial€counsel€believed€that€the€pleaÐ @ Ðbargain€was€to€the€petitionerððs€benefit.€€Ð  \ ÐÌà  àà ` àTrial€counsel€testified€at€the€post„conviction€hearing€that€he€had€interviewed€OfficerÐ ¤ô ÐBirchwell,€the€officer€who€arrested€the€petitioner.€€He€also€testified€that€he€reviewed€the€StateððsÐ p!À  Ðdiscovery€file€and€provided€the€petitioner€with€copies€of€the€relevant€portions€of€the€discovery.€Ð <#Œ" ÐMoreover,€trial€counsel€testified€that€he€discussed€the€evidence€the€State€possessed,€what€the€StateÐ %X $ Ðhad€to€prove,€and€the€guilty€plea€at€some€length€with€the€petitioner.€€The€post„conviction€court€choseÐ Ô&$"& Ðto€credit€trial€counselððs€testimony€over€that€of€the€petitioner.€€Notably,€the€petitioner€even€stated€toÐ  (ð#( Ðthe€trial€court€at€his€plea€hearing€that€he€was€satisfied€with€the€performance€of€his€trial€counsel.Ð l*¼%* ÐBecause€the€post„conviction€court€was€in€a€better€position€than€this€court€to€evaluate€the€credibilityÐ 8,ˆ', Ðof€the€witnesses,€and€because€the€evidence€does€not€preponderate€otherwise,€we€are€bound€by€theÐ ° Ðfindings€of€the€post„conviction€court.€€òòButleróó,€789€S.W.2d€at€799;€òòsee€alsoóó€òòHendersonóó,€1997€WLÐ |Ì Ð566053,€at€*6.Ð H˜ ÐÌà@²²#ìàB.€Guilty€PleaˆÐ à 0 Ðà  àà ` àThe€petitioner€also€argues€that€his€best€interest€guilty€plea€was€not€knowingly€andÐ ¬ ü  Ðvoluntarily€entered.€€The€petitioner€claims€that€he€would€never€have€entered€a€best€interest€guilty€pleaÐ xÈ  Ðto€attempt€to€sell€cocaine€if€he€had€been€aware€of€his€constitutional€rights,€had€been€advised€aboutÐ D”  Ðthe€Stateððs€case€against€him,€and€if€the€plea€petition€and€proceeding€had€been€properly€explained€toÐ ` Ðhim.Ð Ü, ÐÌà  àà ` àTo€withstand€constitutional€scrutiny,€a€petitioner€must€have€made€a€guilty€pleaÐ tÄ Ðvoluntarily,€understandingly,€and€knowingly.€€òòHicksóó,€983€S.W.2d€at€246(òòcitingóó€òòBoykin€v.€Alabamaóó,Ð @ Ð395€U.S.€238,€244,€89€S.€Ct.€1709,€1713€(1969));€òòsee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€Mackeyóó,€553€S.W.2d€337,€341Ð  \ Ð(Tenn.€1977).€€This€court€must€look€to€the€following€circumstantial€factors€in€determining€whetherÐ Ø( Ða€guilty€plea€was€ð ðknowingðð€and€ð ðvoluntaryðð:Ð ¤ô Ðà8  àthe€relative€intelligence€of€the€defendant;€the€degree€of€his€familiarity€with€criminalÐ p!À  Ðproceedings;€whether€he€was€represented€by€competent€counsel€and€had€theÐ <#Œ" Ðopportunity€to€confer€with€counsel€about€the€options€available€to€him;€the€extent€ofÐ %X $ Ðadvice€from€counsel€and€the€court€concerning€the€charges€against€him;€and€theÐ Ô&$"& Ðreasons€for€his€decision€to€plead€guilty,€including€a€desire€to€avoid€a€greater€penaltyÐ  (ð#( Ðâ âthat€might€result€from€a€jury€trial.€€Ðl*¼%*Ð Ð  ÐòòBlankenship€v.€€Stateóó,€858€S.W.2d€897,€904€(Tenn.€€1993).€€Moreover,€the€petitioner€must€be€awareÐ ° Ðâ âof€the€direct€consequences€of€his€guilty€plea,€the€most€obvious€of€which€is€the€penalty€to€be€imposed.€Ð |Ì ÐòòId.óó€€Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àà ` àAt€the€guilty€plea€hearing,€the€petitioner€repeatedly€told€the€trial€court€that€heÐ à 0 Ðunderstood€the€charges€against€him.€€The€trial€court€informed€the€petitioner€of€his€right€to€a€jury€trial,Ð ¬ ü  Ðright€to€cross„examine€witnesses,€and€the€right€against€self„incrimination.€€The€trial€court€made€theÐ xÈ  Ðpetitioner€aware€that€by€entering€a€best€interest€guilty€plea,€he€was€giving€up€those€rights.€€TheÐ D”  Ðpetitioner€testified€at€the€plea€hearing€that€he€had€gone€over€the€plea€document€with€his€trial€counselÐ ` Ðand€that€he€had€no€questions€about€it.€€After€saying€he€was€satisfied€with€his€trial€counsel,€theÐ Ü, Ðpetitioner€expressed€his€belief€that€ð ðI€thought€it€could€[have]€been€handled€a€little€better€than€this.ðð€Ð ¨ø ÐThe€trial€court€reminded€the€petitioner€that€he€had€a€right€to€a€jury€trial.€€The€petitioner€respondedÐ tÄ Ðthat€he€would€rather€plead€guilty.€€The€trial€court€explained€the€petitionerððs€sentence,€emphasizingÐ @ Ðthat€the€petitionerððs€six€year€sentence€for€attempt€to€sell€cocaine€was€to€run€concurrently€with€otherÐ  \ Ðsentences€the€petitioner€was€already€serving€and€that€this€conviction€could€be€used€to€enhance€futureÐ Ø( Ðconvictions.€€The€State€proceeded€to€read€its€version€of€events.€€When€the€trial€court€asked€theÐ ¤ô Ðpetitioner€if€the€Stateððs€portrayal€of€events€was€accurate,€the€petitioner€replied,€ð ðItððs€not€true,€sir;€butÐ p!À  Ðit€ð!ð€ainððt€nothing€I€can€do€about€it.ðð€€The€petitioner€then€entered€a€best€interest€plea€of€guilty€toÐ <#Œ" Ðattempt€to€sell€cocaine.Ð %X $ ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€petitioner€claims€that€he€did€not€understand€the€meaning€of€a€ð ðbest€interestððÐ  (ð#( Ðguilty€plea.€€In€òòNorth€Carolina€v.€Alfordóó,€400€U.S.€25,€37„38,€95€S.€Ct.€160,€167„168€(1970),€theÐ l*¼%* ÐUnited€States€Supreme€Court€held€that€a€petitioner€could€enter€a€guilty€plea€while€still€protesting€hisÐ 8,ˆ', Ðinnocence.€€In€Tennessee,€a€ð ðbest€interestðð€or€òòAlfordóó€plea€may€be€accepted€by€the€trial€court€as€longÐ ° Ðas€there€is€a€factual€basis€for€the€guilty€plea.€€òòDortch€v.€Stateóó,€705€S.W.2d€687,€689€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð |Ì ÐApp.€1985).€€Ð H˜ ÐÌà  àà ` àEven€if€the€trial€court,€or€the€petitionerððs€trial€counsel,€did€not€explain€to€the€petitionerÐ à 0 Ðthe€difference€between€a€guilty€plea€and€a€best€interest€guilty€plea,€the€petitionerððs€decision€to€pleadÐ ¬ ü  Ðguilty€is€not€rendered€involuntary.€€òòSeeóó€òòHicksóó,€983€S.W.2d€at€247„248.€€Except€for€the€petitionerððsÐ xÈ  Ðprotestation€of€innocence,€a€best€interest€guilty€plea€is€treated€like€any€other€guilty€plea.€€òòId.óó€€ThisÐ D”  Ðcourt€has€found€that€even€if€the€petitioner€had€no€specific€knowledge€of€what€a€best€interest€guiltyÐ ` Ðplea€is,€the€petitioner€nonetheless€entered€a€knowing€and€voluntary€guilty€plea€if€the€petitioner€hadÐ Ü, Ðthe€information€necessary€to€understand€the€consequences€of€pleading€guilty€and€intelligently€madeÐ ¨ø Ðthe€choice€to€plead€guilty.€€òòId.ó󀀀РtÄ ÐÌà  àà ` àAt€the€post„conviction€hearing,€the€petitioner€admitted€that€he€had€previously€pleaded€Ð  \ Ðguilty€to€five€separate€felony€charges.€€Moreover,€trial€counsel€testified€at€the€post„conviction€hearingÐ Ø( Ðthat€the€petitioner€seemed€to€understand€the€plea€process€much€better€than€his€other€clients.€€TheÐ ¤ô Ðpetitioner€knew€about€the€Stateððs€evidence€against€him€and€the€possible€defenses€that€he€could€raiseÐ p!À  Ðat€trial.€€The€trial€court€and€the€petitionerððs€trial€counsel€informed€the€petitioner€about€hisÐ <#Œ" Ðconstitutional€rights.€Nonetheless,€the€petitioner€chose€to€enter€a€best€interest€guilty€plea€to€attemptÐ %X $ Ðto€sell€cocaine.€€Furthermore,€the€petitionerððs€statement€ð ðainððt€nothing€I€can€do€about€itðð€may€meanÐ Ô&$"& Ðthat,€given€the€Stateððs€evidence€against€him€and€the€undesirability€of€going€to€trial,€the€onlyÐ  (ð#( Ðâ âintelligent€choice€was€to€enter€a€best€interest€guilty€plea.€€òòSeeóó€òòHicksóó,€983€S.W.2d€at€248.€TheÐ l*¼%* Ðpetitioner€has€failed€to€establish€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence€that€his€guilty€pleas€were€notÐ ° Ðknowing€and€voluntary.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.Ð |Ì Ðâ â€Ìà@ff#ìàòòò òIII.€Conclusionóóó óˆÐ  d Ðà  àà ` àBased€upon€the€foregoing,€we€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€post„conviction€court.Ð à 0 ÐÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð ` Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àNORMA€McGEE€OGLE,€JUDGE