WPCf + /U'9<P/U_L ͇ԐtW, A"dСL(qX UnrҫخM),sWB]Y ~dE"lKқCaƭyi ? c,:yA;?ط"0y)- IEdtfR>$I3S\Nȍۢoa&y8-4ʲ S˦CFq6ebP YTNY$bbtѝB;0iWa fSIS\]ԉjtD% 0"& 0' 0' 0( 0) 0* 0_+b:, 08B, 0<z- 0h- 0<. 0BZ. 0u. 0C0 BT0 D/q0U[>0U*0@1U3@H3 D53 D53 B3 D54 BD4 Ba4 D1~4 D54 B*4 D55 0UC5N55555 7255N5 05 06 0v7 058 0 9 09 0: B9; 0V; 0; D3< D-< 0K= D5L= AS== 0> 0D>? A? B*-@ D5W@ B*@ D5@ B*@ D5A B7JA B7A CA CA CA CB C B C:B CTB CnB CB CB CB CB D5B B%C D7BC D/yC 0C 0ID 0E 0E 0F 0?G 0G 0H 0"I 0I 0DJ 0K 0K 0L 0.M 0M 0pN 0O 0O 0$P 0P 0Q 0>RR 0R 0S 0jT 0LU 0.V 0W 0W 0X 02~Y 0Y 0:Z 0YZ 0_?[ 0 [ 0\ 0*^ 00` D/6b 0eb 063c 0ic 0:qd 0^d 0< e 1eEe 1ue 72fU6QfU*fHP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL6V,,,,V0q/ (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regularlk.: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|x U2P+M 0_level1  , 8.4 <DL!823  ..  5+ 4 <DL!5  ӁLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 52M+M 0_level2  X 5+4 44 <DL!523  ..  5+ 4 <DL!5  2M+M 0_level3   5+` ` ` <DL!523  ..  5+ 4 <DL!5  2J+M 0_level4   2( <DL!223  ..  5+ 4 <DL!5  2J+M 0_level5   2( <DL!223  ..  5+ 4 <DL!5  2G+M 0_level6   /% <DL!/23  ..  5+ 4 <DL!5  2G+M 0_level7  4 /% <DL!/23  ..  5+ 4 <DL!5  2D+M 0_level8  ` ,"< <<DL!,23  ..  5+ 4 <DL!5  2D+M 0_level9   ,"h hhDL!,23  ..  5+ 4 <DL!5  2PM 0_levsl1  , 8.4 <DL!823  Ԁ  5+ 4 <DL!5  2MM 0_levsl2  X 5+4 44 <DL!523  Ԁ  5+ 4 <DL!5  2MM 0_levsl3   5+` ` ` <DL!523  Ԁ  5+ 4 <DL!5  2JM 0_levsl4   2( <DL!223  Ԁ  5+ 4 <DL!5  2JM 0_levsl5   2( <DL!223  Ԁ  5+ 4 <DL!5  2GM 0_levsl6   /% <DL!/23  Ԁ  5+ 4 <DL!5  2GM 0_levsl7  4 /% <DL!/23  Ԁ  5+ 4 <DL!5  2DM 0_levsl8  ` ,"< <<DL!,23  Ԁ  5+ 4 <DL!5  2DM 0_levsl9   ,"h hhDL!,23  Ԁ  5+ 4 <DL!5  2PM 0_levnl1  , 8.4 <DL!823   5+ 4 <DL!5  2MM 0_levnl2  X 5+4 44 <DL!523   5+ 4 <DL!5  2MM 0_levnl3   5+` ` ` <DL!523   5+ 4 <DL!5  2JM 0_levnl4   2( <DL!223   5+ 4 <DL!5  2JM 0_levnl5   2( <DL!223   5+ 4 <DL!5  2GM 0_levnl6   /% <DL!/23   5+ 4 <DL!5  2GM 0_levnl7  4 /% <DL!/23   5+ 4 <DL!5  2DM 0_levnl8  ` ,"< <<DL!,23   5+ 4 <DL!5  2DM 0_levnl9   ,"h hhDL!,23   5+ 4 <DL!5  - -6 t4Heading 1XXX?9\  `Times?         ?9\  `Times?XXX<:Default Para6 4Body Text    < :Footnote Tex<:Footnote Ref8 6Block TextS8\  `&Times New RomanS    ," <DL,   5+ 4 <DL!5?9\  `Times?  ($     d6)1dxd\  `&Times New Roman\  `Times 6 !.8dd8 @    _2  2  3    1  3  TAttheconclusionofthepostconvictionevidentiaryhearing,theoriginaltrialtranscriptswereofferedanddesignated  ExhibitNo.1totheproceedings.Therecordbeforeus,however,doesnotincludethesetranscripts.'\  s`(Times New Romanc6666)!dxdx>>>>)!dxdxP Pd@@@@)!dxdx d d>>)! dxdxDDDD)!dxdx&0 d dbbbb)!dxdx*+ (_2623  ..i)*G+G (_25   /%` ` hp x /23  ../%` ` hp x /   *8+8 (_24  ," hp x ,23  ..," hp x ,  *5+5 (_23 ` ) hp x )23  ..) hp x ) ` (|G2xy$ !.8dd8         0  T*2+2 (_22  &hhp x &23  ..&hhp x &  */+/ (_21  #p x #23  ..#p x #  *,+, (_20 h  p x 23  .. p x h  d*)+) (_19  pp x 23  ..pp x   (|3#$ !.8dd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  AAAA)!dxdx^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3#$ !.8dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK&P d ddddd)!dxdx&p d Pdffff)!dxdx&p Pd dhihi)!dxdx3+0 d d d3+0 d d dd ddd(d2dB݌ " ! Ќ  *  XL  XL*;XO X X8XO  48XO X X;XO  <" <DL  XL<  4uD  4uDE݌ #" Ќ  *  XL  XL*;XO X X8XO  48XO X X;XO  <" <DL  XL<  4E  FromtheFreemanfarm,thedefendantproceededtoGreens $# Marketwherehepurchasedacaseofbeerwith$20cash.Hethen t% $ drovetoClarksvillewhereheatebreakfastatapancakerestaurant ]&!% andrentedaroomattheQualityInn.Thedefendantpaid$44incash F'"& fortheroom,rentedamoviefor$7,andtippedthemaid$5for /(#' deliveringthemovietotheroom.4EF݌ )h$( Ќ  *  XL  XL*;XO X X8XO  48XO X X;XO  <" <DL  XL<  4 I  4 II݌ *Q%) Ќ  *  XL  XL*;XO X X8XO  48XO X X;XO  <" <DL  XL<  4J  Amailcarrierdiscoveredthevictimsbodylyingalongaroad *:&* inruralHoustonCountyaround10:30thatmorning.Thevictim,who +#'+ hadalargesumofcurrencythepreviousevening,hadonlychange  inhispocketwhenfound.4J1K݌  Ќ  *  XL  XL*;XO X X8XO  48XO X X;XO  <" <DL  XL<  4M  4MM݌  Ќ  *  XL  XL*;XO X X8XO  48XO X X;XO  <" <DL  XL<  4N  Thedefendantswhereaboutsfortherestofthedayare k disputed.Thedefendantclaimedtohavevisitedariverfrontpark T afterleavingthepancakerestaurant,thentohavetraveledbacktothe =   oldLockBbottomswhereheremaineduntilthateveningwhenhe & v presentedhimselfattheDicksonCountySheriffsoffice.Thestate  _ presentedevidenceofthedefendantsstayattheQualityInnin  H Clarksville.4N,O݌  1  Ќ  *  XL  XL*;XO X X8XO  48XO X X;XO  <" <DL  XL<  4R  4RR݌    Ќ  *  XL  XL*;XO X X8XO  48XO X X;XO  <" <DL  XL<  4S  LieutenantRandyStarkeywiththeDicksonCountySheriffs   OfficetestifiedthathewasattheSheriffsStationNo.2onthe   eveningofJuly20,1995,whenthedefendantarrivedatthestation   andengagedhiminconversation.Starkeystatedthatthedefendant n  hadbeentothestationseveraltimesasaresultoftheinvestigation W  oftheWaltonhomicides.Thus,whenthedefendantmentioned @ drinkingbeerwiththevictimattheMurphyresidencetheprevious )y night,Starkeybecameinterested.Heaskedthedefendantwhatthe b defendantknewaboutthevictim.Thedefendantaskedifthevictim K hadgottenintosometrouble.Starkeythenrelatedthestoryofthe 4 victimbeingfoundmurderedthatmorning.4S(T݌  Ќ  *  XL  XL*;XO X X8XO  48XO X X;XO  <" <DL  XL<  4X  4X'Y݌  Ќ  *  XL  XL*;XO X X8XO  48XO X X;XO  <" <DL  XL<  4Y  ....4YZ݌  Ќ  *  XL  XL*;XO X X8XO  48XO X X;XO  <" <DL  XL<  4j[  4j[ \݌  Ќ  *  XL  XL*;XO X X8XO  48XO X X;XO  <" <DL  XL<  4\  Thedefendantrelatedhisversionofthepreviousevenings q eventstotheofficers.Thedefendantneglectedtotelltheofficers Z aboutrunningoutofgas,buyingbeerandrentingamotelroomthat C morning.Thedefendanttoldtheofficershespentthenightwatching ,| three(3)bargesattheriverbottoms.Thedefendantrelatedthathe e hadonly$5inhispossessionatthattime.Thefactthatthedefendant N wascarryingashotgunwasdiscoveredinnormalconversation.  7 AgentWatkinswenttothedefendantstruckandseizedabreeched, !   unloaded.20gaugeshotgun.Watkinsalsonoticedthattheinteriorof " ! thetruckappearedtohavebeenwashedrecently.Waterwaspooled #" inthefloorboard,andthetruckappearedcleanerthanwouldbe $# expectedafterdrivingongravelroads.Thebedwasnoticeably t% $ dirtierthantherestofthetruck.4\{]݌ ]&!% Ќ  *  XL  XL*;XO X X8XO  48XO X X;XO  <" <DL  XL<  X4b  4b  affordthesefactualfindingsapresumptionofcorrectness,whichisovercomeonlywhena ' w preponderanceoftheevidenceiscontrarytothepostconvictioncourt'sfactualfindings.Fieldsv.  ` State,40S.W.3d450,456(Tenn.2001).Apostconvictioncourt'sconclusionsoflawaresubject  I toapurelydenovoreviewbythiscourt,withnopresumptionofcorrectness.Id.at457.The  2  TennesseeSupremeCourthasheldthattheissueofineffectiveassistanceofcounselisamixed    questionoflawandfactand,assuch,issubjecttodenovoreview.Statev.Burns,6S.W.3d453,   461(Tenn.1999).    P |+ X!` X +48XO XXX҇ | 9" <DLX!9   P4  4݌̌ | ' X!  XL'X҇X X8XO  c8HXO X\  `&Times New RomanXX҇c P*ww'X7X!* |48XO X X8XO  ?" <DLww'X7?  -ww'X7  XL-  P4     ` TherightofacriminallyaccusedtorepresentationisguaranteedbyboththeSixth o  AmendmenttotheUnitedStatesConstitutionandArticleI,Section9oftheTennesseeConstitution. X  Id.;Baxterv.Rose,523S.W.2d930,936(Tenn.1975).Thisrighttorepresentationincludesthe A rightto reasonablyeffectiveassistance.Burns,6S.W.3dat461.Inreviewingaclaimof *z ineffectiveassistanceofcounsel,thiscourtmustdeterminewhethertheadvicegivenorservices c renderedbytheattorneyarewithintherangeofcompetencedemandedofattorneysincriminal L cases.Baxter,523S.W.2dat936.Toprevailonaclaimofineffectiveassistanceofcounsel,a 5 petitionermustshowthat counselsrepresentationfellbelowanobjectivestandardof  reasonableness,Stricklandv.Washington,466U.S.668,688,104S.Ct.2052,2064(1984),and  thatthisperformanceprejudicedthedefense,resultinginafailuretoproduceareliableresult.Id.  at687,104S.Ct.at2064;Cooperv.State,849S.W.2d744,747(Tenn.1993).Tosatisfythe  requirementofprejudice,apetitionermustshowareasonableprobabilitythat,butforcounsels r unreasonableerror,thefactfinderwouldhavehadreasonabledoubtregardingthepetitionersguilt. [ Strickland,466U.S.at695,104S.Ct.at206970.Thisreasonableprobabilitymustbe sufficient D toundermineconfidenceintheoutcome.Id.at694,104S.Ct.at2068;seealsoHarrisv.State,875 -} S.W.2d662,665(Tenn.1994).4݌ f Ќ  0ww'X7ww'X708XO X X8XO  _;HXO X\  `&Times New Roman X8XO_48XO X X;XO  ?" <DLww'X7?   4  4T݌̌  -ww'X7  XL-;XO X X8XO  c8HXO X\  `&Times New Roman X;XO4cH+ 4 <DL!ww'X7H48XO X X8XO  9" <DLX!9   4     ` Whenevaluatinganineffectiveassistanceofcounselclaim,thereviewingcourt  8 shouldjudgetheattorneysperformancewithinthecontextofthecaseasawhole,takinginto !!  accountallrelevantcircumstances.Strickland,466U.S.at690,104S.Ct.at2066;Statev.Mitchell, " ! 753S.W.2d148,149(Tenn.Crim.App.1988).Thereviewingcourtmustevaluatethequestionable #" conductfromtheattorneysperspectiveatthetime.Strickland,466U.S.at689,104S.Ct.at2065; $# Cooper,849S.W.2dat746;Hellardv.State,629S.W.2d4,9(Tenn.1982).Indoingso,the u% $ reviewingcourtmustbehighlydeferentialand shouldindulgeastrongpresumptionthatcounsels ^&!% conductfallswithinthewiderangeofreasonableprofessionalassistance.Burns,6S.W.3dat462. G'"& Counselshouldnotbedeemedtohavebeenineffectivemerelybecauseadifferentprocedureor 0(#' strategymighthaveproducedadifferentresult.SeeWilliamsv.State,599S.W.2d276,27980 )i$( (Tenn._Crim_.App.1980).4u݌ *R%)   ' X!  XL'8XO X X8XO     `  *;&*    ` Thepetitionerfirstinsiststhatformercounselsservicesweredeficientand   prejudicialbecausehedidnotsubmitarequestedjuryinstructiononalibi.Thepetitioners  argument,however,merelyrehasheshisprimarycomplaintthataninstructionwasnotgivenand  doesnotaddresscounselsallegedineffectiveness.Thepetitionerhaswhollyfailedtosustainhis k postconvictionburdenwithrespecttothiscomplaint. T    ` Fromcounselstestimonyatthepostconvictionhearing,itisabundantlyclearthat & v counselinvestedconsiderabletimeinhisfactualandlegalinvestigationofthecase.Counsels  _ testimonystandsuncontradictedthathewenttothecrimescene,interviewedallavailablewitnesses,  H traveledtoNashvilletodiscussthehomicidewiththemedicalexaminer,uncoveredindependent  1  evidenceofcrimescenecontamination,filedappropriatemotionstoexcludeevidenceoftheprior    shootingsandtherecoveryofmoneyatthepolicestation,developedastrategytoaccountforthe   anticipatedDNAevidence,andcommunicatedfrequentlywithhisclientandtheclientsfamily.   Thiscourtwillnotsecondguesscounselstrialstrategy,restingasitdoesonanobjectively   reasonableinvestigation.SeeHenleyv.State,960S.W.2d572,579(Tenn.1997)(inaddressing n  attorneyperformance,courtsarenotto secondguesstacticalandstrategicchoicesortomeasure W  attorneysrepresentationby 2020hindsight). @    ` Furthermore,wearenotconvincedthatthetrialevidenceadequatelyraisedthe b questionofalibi.InStatev.ByronLooper,No.E2001-01550-CCA-R3-CD(Tenn._Crim_.App., K Knoxville,Feb.3,2003),perm.app.denied(Tenn.,Jul.7,2003),thecourtquotedwithapproval 4 fromBlacksLawDictionarydefining alibias [a]defensebasedonthephysicalimpossibility  ofadefendantsguiltbyplacingthedefendantinalocationotherthanthesceneofthecrimeatthe  relevanttime.Id.,slipop.at38(quotingBlacksLawDictionary72(7thed.1999)).Thecourt  furthere_xplained_,     [A]defendantincloseenoughphysicalproximitytohavecommitted Z thecrimemaydenythecriminalactivityandmayaffirmativelyassert C thathewaselsewhereatthecriticaltime.However,iftheasserted ,| alternatelocationissuchthat,basedontheversionofevents e contendedforbythedefense,itwouldremainwithintherealmof N physicalpossibilityforthedefendanttohavecommittedthecrime,  7 thenthedefenseisnothingmorethanadenialandwouldnotriseto !   thelevelofalibi. " !  , :Id.,slipop.at39(quotingOwensv.State,809So.2d744,746-47(Miss.Ct.App.2002)). $#    ` Measuredbytheforegoingstandard,wedonotbelievethatthedefenseofalibiwas ]&!% fairlyraisedbytheevidenceatthepetitionerstrial. F'"&    ` Next,thepetitionerarguesinconclusoryfashionthattrialcounselwasineffective )h$( inrequestingorallowingthetrialcourttodismissthejurysguiltyverdictonthepremeditated *Q%) murderchargeand,instead,toenterajudgmentonthefelonymurderconviction. *:&*  +#'+    ` Thelawissettledthatpremeditatedmurderandfelonymurderarenotseparate  offenses,butdifferenttheoriesofguiltforthecrimeoffirstdegreemurder.Thereisnobarto  verdicts,asinthiscase,beingreturnedonbothcounts.Theverdictsstandas legitimatefinding[s]  offactwhichthetrialcourtshouldpreservebymerging...intoonejudgmentofconviction.State k v.Addison,973S.W.2d260,267(Tenn.Crim.App.1997).Inthiscase,itdoesnotappearthatthe T juryverdictsweremergedintoonejudgmentofconvictionforfirstdegreemurder.Rather,it =  appearsthataftertheverdictswerereturned,thetrialcourtexaminedthelegalsufficiencyofthe & v evidence,foundevidenceofpremeditationtobelacking,andvacatedthejurysverdictonthat  _ theoryoffirstdegreemurder.SeeDennisR.Gilliland,No.01C019707CC00256,slipop.at2n.1.  H    ` Wefailtoseehowcounselcanbeheldconstitutionallyineffectiveasthepetitioner    claims.Thepetitionerwasnotentitledtopickorchoosewhichcountorverdicttodismiss.That   decisionwasdrivenbythelegalsufficiencyoftheevidence,notthepetitionerspreferenceortrial   counselseffectiveness.Moreover,evenhadthetrialcourtsetasideorvacatedthefelonymurder   conviction,thestatewouldhavebeenaffordedtheopportunitytoappealthatruling.SeeTenn.R. n  Crim.App.29(c)( Thestateshallhavetherightofappealwherethecourtsetsasideaverdictof W  guiltyandentersajudgmentofacquittal.).Inasmuchasthelegalsufficiencyoftheevidence @ supportingthefelonymurderconvictionpreviouslywaschallengedunsuccessfullyondirectappeal, )y nopossibleshowingofprejudicecanbemadeinthecontextofineffectiveassistanceofcounsel. b    ` Thepetitionersfinalineffectivenesscomplaintisequallyvagueandconclusory.He 4 arguesthatcounsel failedtopointoutrelevantargumentsregardingtheDefendantbeingseenin  handcuffsandthatthejurysverdictshowsthatit didnotlistentoorfollowtheinstructionsofthe  trialcourt.Thepetitionerraisedtheissueondirectappealthathewasunfairlyprejudicedwhen  heappearedbeforethejuryinhandcuffs.Thiscourtrejectedtheissueonthebasisthatthetrial  courthadgivencurativeinstructionstothejurytodisregardanyglimpsesofthepetitionerin q restraints.SeeDennisR.Gilliland,slipop.at1112. Z    ` Totheextentthatthepetitionerisattemptingtorelitigatetheissueanew,hecannot ,| prevailastheissuehasbeenpreviouslydetermined.AclaimunderthePostConvictionProcedure e Actisprocedurallydefaultedifithasbeen previouslydetermined,meaningthat acourtof N competentjurisdictionhasruledonthemeritsafterafullandfairhearing.Tenn.CodeAnn.40  7 30106(h)(2003).Nordoestheissuefareanybetterasanineffectiveassistanceofcounselclaim. !   Evenifweassumethattherewassomeactionthatcounseldidnotpursuebutshouldhavetaken,the " ! petitionersimplyhasnotdemonstratedtherequisiteprejudicerequiredtosuccessfullychallenge #" counselseffectiveness. $#    DueProcess  ]&!% B   ` Thelastissuethatthepetitionerraisesonappealneednotdetainuslong.The 0(#' petitionerrenewshisargumentthatevidenceofhisinvolvementintwofatalshootingsashorttime )i$( beforetheBushhomicidewaserroneouslyadmitted.Thepetitioneracknowledgesthatthisissue *R%)  wasaddressedbytheTennesseeSupremeCourtandfoundtobeharmlesserror,buthearguesthe *;&* erroneousadmissionhasnotbeenconsideredfromthedueprocessstandpointofdenyinghimafair  trialbyanimpartialjury.      ` Adefendantinacriminalcasemaynot objecttotheintroductionofevidenceathis k trialupononeground,deemedbyhimtobeproper,andthen,laterinaproceedingforpost T convictionrelief,assertthatadmissionoftheevidencecomplainedofviolatedaconstitutional =  right.Statev.Miller,668S.W.2d281,285(Tenn.1984).Thefailuretoasserttheconstitutional & v groundintheoriginalproceedingconstitutesawaiverofanyerrorintheadmissionoftheevidence  _ atissue.SeeRonaldC.Mitchellv.State,No.W1999-01097-CCA-R3-PC,slipop.at6(Tenn._Crim_.  H App.,Jackson,April6,2000)(courtquestionedwhetherpetitionerhadpresentednewgroundfor  1  reliefwhenheallegedinconnectionwithpostconvictionthatadmissionofpagerandmoneyattrial    violateddueprocess,afterarguingondirectappealthatadmissionviolatedCriminalProcedureRule   16);TerryL._Bomar_Ԁv.State,No.C.C.A.8822III,slipop.at3(Tenn._Crim_.App.,Nashville,Sept.   28,1988)(aspetitionerobjectedtojoinderofoffensesunderapplicableproceduralrule,hecannot   nowallegethatseveranceshouldhavebeengrantedonconstitutionalgrounds;issuepreviously n  determined). W     ` Foralltheforegoingreasons,weaffirmthepostconvictioncourtsrejectionofthe )y petitionforpostconvictionrelief. b    `     h     _________________________________     `     h     JAMES_CURWOOD_Ԁ_WITT_,JR.,JUDGE  _;HXO X\  `&Times New Roman X8XO_48XO X X;XO  9" <DLX!9   E+ 4 <DL!  XLE4  4݌̌  $ X!X!$;XO X X8XO  <% 4 <DLX!<c8HXO X\  `&Times New Roman X;XOjc_;HXO X\  `&Times New Roman X8XO_