WPCv _ pWE{̚ZoPٗf"=%>LuY?{;Тٛ,B+Kxy#:bAZ=&2V=eXѯ5:s0ɖwE%|IQY-/[QWߓ5&`FfPbUN\ % 0^ 8wD4H\ zk m # UN   k 1 0DN;=Ebkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk 0ssss B^^ 0{ D3 D-R 0K AS 0 0D A(hH  Z6Times New Roman Regular(`$.8dd8    -s Yo)Ӥ3|x C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptUHP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 60(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#$  0    R$      1    _TherecordsuggeststhattheAppellantGoss accidentallyshothismothertodeathwitha12gaugedouble  barrelshotgunatage13"andthathehas beenkeptinmaximumsecurityforseventeenyearsforvariouscrimes.The t AppellantHalehasbeeninprisonsince1978asaresultofconvictionsformurderandarmedrobbery.Sincehis 8 incarceration,hehasbeenconvictedofmanslaughter,seconddegreemurder,firstdegreemurder,andassaultwithintent L tocommitmurder.  R$      2    _The1983dischargesummaryindicatedtheAppellantwashaving problemswithbehaviordiscontrol....On  mentalstatusexaminationthepatientwasanalert,friendly,cooperative,Caucasian,male....Therewasnoevidence t ofthoughtderailment,hallucinationsnordelusions.Cognitivefunctionswereintact....  R$      3    _ThecrimesforwhichtheAppellantswereconvictedwerecommittedonAugust25,1995.EffectiveJuly1,  1995,TennesseeCodeAnnotated3911501(a)wasamendedbyplacingtheburdenofprovinginsanityuponthe t defendantbyclearandconvincingevidence. R$      4    _T.P.I._Crim_.40.16(b).- -(|G2$ !.8%dd8         0   d(|3n$ !.8%dd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3n$ !.8%dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8%dd8     _   %8rXXdd8@tt(%INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @%ATJACKSON#%( #Ԉ &    @  @` May7,2002Session L XrX% #%XXr#ROBERTLEE_GOSS_ԀandCARLW.HALEv.STATEOFTENNESSEEXrX%  J @@ DirectAppealfromtheCircuitCourtforLauderdaleCounty  J @@No.6242JosephH.Walker,Judge  6 @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.W200102504CCAR3PC_Ԅ_ԀFiledAugust13,_2002_   AV) ` dE<|` A }      XrXXXrTheAppellants,RobertLee_Goss_ԀandCarlW.Hale,wereconvictedbyaLauderdaleCountyjuryof x  firstdegreemurderandaggravatedassault.TheyappealasofrightthejudgmentoftheLauderdale d CountyCircuitCourtdenyingtheirpetitionsforpost-convictionrelief.Onappeal,theAppellants P arguethattrialcounselwereineffectivebecausetheydidnotpursueadefenseofinsanityand/or < diminishedcapacity.Afterreviewoftherecord,wefindthattheAppellantsreceivedtheeffective (x assistanceofcounsel.Accordingly,thejudgmentofthepostconvictioncourtisaffirmed.#XrXX Xr ##%XXr#XrX% d  Tenn.R.App.P.3;JudgmentoftheCircuitCourtAffirmed.  <   #%Xr?#XrX.%DavidG.Hayes,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichJerryL.SmithandAlanE.  Glenn,JJ.,joined.  MichaelW.Whitaker,Covington,Tennessee,fortheAppellant,RobertW._Goss_;WilliamDan  Douglas,Jr.,Ripley,Tennessee,fortheAppellant,CarlHale. t PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneralandReporter;MichaelMoore,SolicitorGeneral;J.RossDyer, L  AssistantAttorneyGeneral;ElizabethT.Rice,DistrictAttorneyGeneral;andTraceyBrewer, 8!  AssistantDistrictAttorneyGeneral,fortheAppellee,StateofTennessee. $"t! #%XXr #XrX%@@OO& OPINION #%XXr #XrX% $8 $  FactualBackground  &"& #%XXr #  XrX% XrXXXr  OnMay21,1996,theAppellants,whileincarceratedintheDepartmentofCorrection,were (#( convictedoffirstdegreemurderofanotherinmate,WillisMcDonald,andoftheaggravatedassault )$) ofacorrectionalofficer.Forbackgroundpurposes,thefollowingfactsarerecitedfromthiscourts p*%* decisionaffirmingtheAppellantsconvictions: \+&+   H,', 8  Inthelightmostfavorabletothestate,theevidenceestablishesthatthedefendants   killedMcDonalddeliberatelyandwithpremeditation.Theproofshowsthatonthe  dayoftheoffenses,Haletold_Goss_ԀthatMcDonaldhadmadethreatsagainsthimand  _Goss_.WhenMcDonaldreturnedfromtheshowerwearingonlyatowel,Haleshut t McDonaldscelldoor._Goss_,whodidnothavepermissiontobeinthepod,thenran ` upthestairs.AlthoughMcDonaldwasunarmed,thedefendantsstabbedhim L  repeatedlyastheystruggled,andMcDonaldfelldownthestairs.Thedefendantsran 8  downthestepsafterMcDonald,and_Goss_ԀkneeledoverMcDonaldandrepeatedly $ t stabbedhiminthechestashelaynakedonthefloor.As_Goss_Ԁwasstabbing  ` McDonald,Haleheldaknifeinhishandandtoldtheofficerstoleave_Goss_Ԁalone  L  whilehewas takingcareofbusiness.Afterwards,thedefendantsappearedcalm. 8    Statev._Goss_,995S.W.2d617,62526(Tenn._Crim_.App.1998),perm.toappealdenied,(Tenn.   1999).     In1999,theAppellantsfiledpetitionsforpostconvictionrelief.Anevidentiaryhearingwas   heldonSeptember13,2001.OnSeptember14,2001,thepost-convictioncourtdeniedthe p Appellantspost-convictionrelief,findingthattheAppellantsreceivedtheeffectiveassistanceof \ counsel.Thistimelyappealfollowed. H   ANALYSIS   p   TheAppellantsraiseoneissueforourreview:whethertrialcounselwereineffectivebecause H offailuretopursueadefenseofinsanityand/ordiminishedcapacity.Tosucceedinachallengefor 4 ineffectiveassistanceofcounsel,theAppellantsmustestablish,under_Strickland_Ԁv.Washington,466   U.S.668,687,104S.Ct.2052,2064(1984):(1)deficientrepresentation,and(2)prejudiceresulting   fromthedeficiency.Thus,theAppellantsmustprovethatcounsel"madeerrorssoseriousthat  counselwasnotfunctioningasthe'counsel'guaranteedthedefendantbytheSixthAmendment,"and  theAppellantsmustdemonstratethatcounselserrors weresoseriousastodeprivethe[Appellants]  ofafairtrial,atrialwhoseresultisreliable."Id.Areviewingcourtneednotconsiderthetwo l prongsof_Strickland_inanyparticularorder.Id.at697.Moreover,iftheAppellantsfailtoestablish X  oneprong,areviewingcourtneednotconsidertheother.Id. D!    Withrespecttodeficientperformance,theAppellantsmustdemonstratethatcounsels #l! representationfellbelowtherangeofcompetencedemandedofattorneysincriminalcases.Baxter $X" v.Rose,523S.W.2d930,936(Tenn.1975).Thiscourt"mustindulgeastrongpresumptionthat $D # [counsels]conductfallswithinthewiderangeofreasonableprofessionalassistance;thatis,the %0!$ [Appellants]mustovercomethepresumptionthat,underthecircumstances,thechallengedaction &"% 'mightbeconsideredsoundtrialstrategy.'"_Strickland_,466U.S.at689.Weshoulddefertotrial '#& strategyortacticalchoicesiftheyareinformedonesbaseduponadequatepreparation.Charles (#' WaltonWrightv.State,No.01C019105CR00149(Tenn._Crim_.App.atNashville,Apr.7,1994), )$( perm.toappealdenied,(Tenn.1994),cert.denied,513U.S.1163,115S.Ct.1129(1995)(citing |*%) _Hellard_Ԁv.State,629S.W.2d4,9(Tenn.1982)).Additionally,thiscourtshouldavoidthe"distorting h+&* effectsofhindsight"and"judgethereasonablenessof[counsels]challengedconductonthefacts  oftheparticularcase,viewedasofthetimeof[counsels]conduct."_Strickland_,466U.S.at68990.  Moreover,wenotethatdefendantsarenotentitledtoperfectrepresentation,onlyconstitutionally  adequaterepresentation. t   Toestablishtheprejudiceprongof_Strickland_,theAppellantsmustshowthatthereisa L  reasonableprobabilitythat,butforcounselsdeficientperformance,theresultoftheproceeding 8  wouldhavebeendifferent._Strickland_,466U.S.at694.Areasonableprobabilityisonesufficient $ t toundermineconfidenceintheoutcome.Id.Thatis,theevidencestemmingfromfailingtoprepare  ` asounddefenseorpresentwitnessesmustbesignificant,butitdoesnotnecessarilyfollowthatthe  L  trialwouldhaveotherwiseresultedinanacquittal._Brimmer_Ԁv.State,29S.W.3d497,508(Tenn.  8  _Crim_.App.1998)(citing_Nealy_Ԁv.Cabana,764F.2d1173,117879(5thCir.1985);Codev. $  Montgomery,799F.2d1481,1483(11thCir.1986))."Areasonableprobabilityofbeingfoundguilty   ofalessercharge,orashortersentence,satisfiesthesecondprongin_Strickland_."Id.at509(citing   Statev.Zimmerman,823S.W.2d220,225(Tenn._Crim_ԀApp.1991)).     Theissuesofdeficientperformancebycounselandpossibleprejudicetothedefenseare p mixedquestionsoflawandfact.Statev.Burns,6S.W.3d453,461(Tenn.1999). Atrialcourts \ findingsoffactunderlyingaclaimofineffectiveassistanceofcounselarereviewedonappealunder H adenovostandard,accompaniedwithapresumptionthatthosefindingsarecorrectunlessthe 4 preponderanceoftheevidenceisotherwise.Fieldsv.State,40S.W.3d450,458(Tenn.2001)  p (citingTenn.R.App.P.13(d));seeHenleyv.State,960S.W.2d572,578(Tenn.1997).However,  \ conclusionsoflawarereviewedunderapurelydenovostandard,withnopresumptionof H correctness.Fields,40S.W.3dat458. 4   BothAppellantscontendthattheirrespectivetrialcounselwereineffectivefornot   investigatingorpursuingadefenseofinsanityand/ordiminishedcapacitybaseduponinformation  thatwasavailableandapparenttothem.TheAppellant_Goss_Ԁarguesthathistrialcounselwith  minimalinvestigationcouldhavediscoveredfromhismedicalrecordsdocumentationofa mental  defectorfrontallobeinjurywhichcouldhavesupportedintroductionofevidenceondiminished l capacity.Moreover,hecontendsthatmedicalrecordsfrom1983revealedthat adocumented X  historyofNeuropsychologicaltestingshowedconsiderablefrontallobepathology,possiblyrelated D! tohisautoaccident,possiblyrelatedtogluesniffing.TheAppellantHalearguesthat [_c]ounsel_ 0"  wasawarethatfromtheverybeginningofherrepresentationthatthe[Appellant],hadverylittle,if #l! any,educationandcouldnotreadorwrite.Finally,bothAppellantsarguethattheirpriorhistory $X" ofcommittingcrimesofviolenceshouldhavealertedtrialcounseltopursuementalevaluations, $D # whichcouldhavesupportedadefenseofinsanityand/ordiminishedcapacity. #  1       %0!$  &"% Ї  Whileacriminaldefendant'sdiminishedcapacitydoesnotconstituteadefensecapableof  excusingordefeatingacriminalcharge,evidenceofthediminishedcapacityisrelevantto  determiningthedefendant'smens_rea_.Statev._Grose_,982S.W.2d349,353(Tenn._Crim_.App.  1997)(citingStatev._Phipps_,883S.W.2d138,148(Tenn._Crim_.App.1994)).Underthediminished t capacityruleofevidence,adefendantisrequiredtointroduceevidence,typicallyexpertmedical ` testimony,toestablishthatthedefendantatthetimeofthecrimewasincapableofformingthe L  requisiteintentofthecrimecharged.Atthepostconvictionhearing,theAppellantHaleintroduced 8  nomedicalproofsupportinghisclaimswhiletheAppellant_Goss_Ԁintroducedamedicaldischarge $ t summarydatingbackto1983whenhewasseventeenyearsold. #  2        `   Withregardtothedefenseofinsanity,adefendantisrequiredtoprove,byclearand  8  convincingevidence,that: $  8  (a)[_A]s_Ԁaresultofaseverementaldiseaseordefect,[thedefendant]wasunableto   appreciatethenatureorwrongfulnessofsuchdefendantsacts.Mentaldiseaseor   defectdoesnototherwiseconstituteadefense.    8  (b)Asusedinthissection, mentaldiseaseordefectdoesnotincludeany \ abnormalitymanifestedonlybyrepeatedcriminalorotherwiseantisocialconduct.H   Tenn.CodeAnn.3911501(a)(b)(1997). #  3      ׀Accordingly,inorderforthedefenseofinsanitytobe  p viable,itwouldhavebeenincumbentuponeachAppellanttoestablish(1)thathehadasevere  \ mentaldiseaseordefectatthetimethattheactsconstitutingthecrimewerecommitted,and(2)that H asaresultofthisseverementaldiseaseordefect,hewasunabletounderstandwhathewasdoing 4 orthatwhathewasdoingwaswrong. #  4      ׀AsobservedbythelanguageofTennesseeCodeAnnotated   3911501(b)(1997),theAppellants'priorhistoriesofrepeatedcriminalconductandantisocial   behaviorwillnotsupportadefenseofinsanity.    Ifanineffectiveassistanceofcounselclaimisbaseduponfailuretoproperlyinvestigate,  evidenceorwitnessesmustbeproducedsothatthepostconvictioncourtcanproperlyevaluatethe l claim.Blackv.State,794S.W.2d752,757(Tenn._Crim_.App.1990).Proofofdeficient X  representationbyfailuretoactrequiresmorethanaspeculativeshowingoflostpotentialbenefits. D!  TheproofpresentedbytheAppellantsfailstoestablishthatanothercourseofconductbytheirtrial 0"  counselhadareasonableprobabilityofproducingadifferentresult.Accordingly,theAppellants  havenotdemonstratedprejudice.     CONCLUSION  t     Basedupontheforegoing,wefindthatthepostconvictioncourtdidnoterrinrulingthatthe L  Appellantsreceivedtheeffectiveassistanceofcounsel.Accordingly,thejudgmentoftheCircuit 8  CourtofLauderdaleCountyisaffirmed.#XrXX XrG # $ t    `     h     ___________________________________      `     h     DAVIDG.HAYES,JUDGE