WPC 7T*gVٲlEZH:+Le.lge9 *whվŹ7uj⛠\{=J$GNvhZOpܩ'aEB z+m'ʆY+Oa]˂HZIQ<~Ƶ>QiJ#F1<Ëjn䬭+UfYѥd%rd]oKT<҃V"t5SXptzU·pig7蚵t.p%]z7eiqY(-4^;8 TAeO^ Z?7ӌej6*mhZw"˗5HxE'6$vWpUV l Ut]gK(Y'؛eΌn^d+Ow 2{}%$5ٝwTOCqtHb %\^ b 0nUNwD4H\ zk m #  _ %NEb 0 B 0 D5i D- 0K ASi 0/ 0D A֡/ (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regularb.:i+003|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.wptU\\IB01S08\KNOXCLERK3,,,,0Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5- -(|G29$ !.8]dd8         0   d(|3?i$ !.8]dd8     VVVV)!dxdx)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3?i$ !.8]dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8]dd8     _   ]8P XXdd8@tt,]INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @WW$ATKNOXVILLE#], #Ԉ &    @  @` AssignedonBriefsAugust19,2003 L XP X] #]XXP #MICHAELJ.GRANTv.STATEOFTENNESSEEXP X]  J @@ 0 @ 0 @ 0 @ DirectAppealfromtheCriminalCourtforBradleyCounty  J @@No._M_02837R.Steven_Bebb_,Judge  6 @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.E200300637CCAR3PC   December23,_2003_   AV) ` dE<|` A }     Thepetitionerappealsthesummarydismissalofhispostconvictionpetition.Thepetitioneralleges x  hisuntimelypetitionshouldbetolledondueprocessgroundsbecauseofrelianceoncounsels d  guaranteeofreleasefromincarcerationafterserving30%ofhissentence.Weaffirmthesummary P dismissalforfailuretofileforpostconvictionreliefwithintheoneyearstatuteoflimitations < providedinTennesseeCodeAnnotatedsection4030202(a)andaffirm. (x ) Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheCriminalCourtAffirmed  P   #]XP #XP X.]JohnEverettWilliams,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichAlanE.Glenn,J.,joined. ( JosephM._Tipton_,J.,filedadissentingopinion.  #]XXP "#XP X]MichaelJosephGrant,_Wartburg_,Tennessee,ProSe.  Ѐ  PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneralandReporter;BradenH._Boucek_,AssistantAttorneyGeneral; t JerryN._Estes_,DistrictAttorneyGeneral,andStephenD.Crump,AssistantDistrictAttorney ` General,fortheappellee,StateofTennessee. L  @@OO& OPINION #]XXP Q #XP X] $"t! #]XXP #  XP X] X #`" Thepetitioner,MichaelJosephGrant,allegesinhisprosepostconvictionpetitionthaton #L# April28,2001,heenteredaguiltypleatofivecountsof_kidnapping_Ԁandonecountofrobbery.He $8 $ furtherstatesthathereceivedasentenceofsixyearsasaRangeIoffenderwithareleaseeligibility %$!% dateof30%.Therecorddoesnotcontaindocumentationoftheseallegations,butweacceptthem &"& forpurposesofourreview.Accordingtothepostconvictionpetition,thepetitionerwasdenied '"' paroleonJune10,2002,andhisappealtherefromwasdeniedonAugust9,2002. (#(  )$) ThepetitionerfiledseekingapetitionforpostconvictionreliefonNovember22,2002.On p*%* February7,2003,hispetitionwassummarilydismissedduetountimelyfilingwithoutahearingby \+&+ thetrialcourt.Thatsummarydismissalisnowbeforeusforreview. H,',  4-(- _Thepetitionerallegesthathewas guaranteedbyhistrialcounselthatthepetitionerwould   serve,atmost,onlythirtypercent(30%)ofhissentencedayforday.Trialcounselalsoallegedly  advisedthepetitionerthat,duetothepetitionersmedicalstatusofHIVandHepatitisC,theState  wouldreleasehimattheearliestopportunity. t  ` Thepostconvictionpetitionenumeratestwelveinstancesofallegedmalfeasanceonthepart L  oftrialcounsel.Thepetitioneracknowledgesthatthepetitionisuntimelybutcontendsthathis 8  relianceontheerroneousadviceofcounselcausedthepetitionertoforegofilingforpostconviction $ t reliefwithinthestatutoryperiodandthatdueprocessconsiderationsshouldtollthelimitations  ` period.  L    8   X  Analysis $   X    Withcertainexceptions,thefilingofapostconvictionpetitioninTennesseemustbemade   withinoneyearofthedatetheconvictionbecomesfinal.Tenn.CodeAnn.4030202(a)(1997   andSupp.2002).However,acourtmayconsideranuntimelypetitionifthestatuteoflimitations   woulddenythepetitionerdueprocess.SeeBurfordv.State,845S.W.2d204,208(Tenn.1992). p Oursupremecourthassaid theprinciplesofdueprocessareflexibleandrequirebalancingofa \ petitionerslibertyinterestsagainsttheStatesfinalityinterestsonacasebycasebasis.Samplev. H State,82S.W.3d267,27374(Tenn.2002). 4   p ThepetitionerhereinplacesheavyrelianceonWilliamsv.State,44S.W.3d464(Tenn.  \ 2001).Thatcaseinvolvedanuntimelypostconvictionpetitionfilingbyapetitionerwhoseattorney H hadfailedtoproperlywithdrawfromrepresentationfollowingadirectappeal.Thepetitioneralleged 4 thathewasunawareofthefinalityofhisconvictionasaresultoftheattorneysactions.Underthose   circumstances,thesupremecourtremandedforanevidentiaryhearingtodetermineifthepetitioner   wasdeniedareasonableopportunitytoseekpostconvictionreliefduetopossiblemisrepresentation  bycounsel.Id.at471.    Inregardtotheinstantcase,thepetitionerallegestwelve(12)instancesofhiscounsels l deficientrepresentation.Onlyoneofthese,the guaranteeofthemaximumtimetoserve,would X  conceivablybeimpactedbyrelianceonthe guarantee.Allotherallegeddeficiencieswereknown D! tothepetitioneratthetimeofhisguiltyplea. 0"   #l! WearenotpersuadedthatthefactsofWilliamsprovidethepetitionerthereliefheseeks. $X" Inthatcase,thepetitionerhadjustifiablereasontobelievehewasstillrepresentedbycounselduring $D # thetimeperiodinwhichthepostconvictionclaimshouldhavebeenfiled.Thereisnosuch %0!$ confusionintheinstantcase,asthepetitionerwasawareofthefinalityofhisconvictiondateand &"% thatnoappealwastobefiled.Thegrievancesthepetitionerallegesagainstcounselwereallextant '#& onthedateheenteredhisplea,savethealleged guaranteeastothemaximumtimeofthe (#' petitionersincarceration.Weconcludethatthepetitionercouldnotreasonablyrelyonsuchan )$( allegedrepresentationandthatthesummarydismissalwasproper. |*%)  h+&*  X  Conclusion     X   Basedontheaforementionedreasonsandtherecordasawhole,weaffirmthetrialcourt.   t  `  L   8   $ t 0 ` 0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#___________________________________ `(#(#  `     h     JOHNEVERETTWILLIAMS,JUDGE