ÿWPC. ÙVùlO`5BòK½6RKùlO`htO„(ª MˆKOí|M³•5l××¢Ö¢à¿>O4z57z’°„>‘ÊUˆÙ6}=£€0eŸÜŽø×¼W"¬øäb(òîÛNžas¯ÜÒZ.=§¸Ä„ä¿ÄJ{oWSðÑVyÑý¼ùAwÇÏ7×"O”™£+ÄwjýÜq ‘t2mýÔ#Í%©°@1éïR†¬16Ü;gÞ+ÄÒ£ÍP¡§ª”)2¶8ƒÙz 6ôOTÿ«ƒ5Ä•c(„´³:¹úy«µ=ÿLkÑFA]o§‹àÝ g›Ú8Ï ïE¤ÅV2á.×ÐÑjX|6 Ðpetition€and€denied€the€motion€to€reopen€without€conducting€an€evidentiaryÐ –6 Ðhearing€and€making€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law;€andÐŽ.` €%` €% ÐÌà0 ` à2)€whether€Petitionerððs€mental€incompetency€excused€any€noncompliance€withÐ ~! Ðthe€requirements€of€the€Post„Conviction€Procedure€Act.Ðv"` €%` €% ÐÌÓÓAfter€a€review€of€the€record,€we€affirm€the€post„conviction€courtððs€dismissal€of€theÐ f$ Ðpetition€and€denial€of€the€motion€to€reopen.Ð V&ö ÐÌà@··(Dàò òI.€€BACKGROUNDó óˆÐ 6*Ö ! ÐÌà ` àAfter€he€was€convicted€and€sentenced€in€1991,€Petitioner€challenged€hisÐ &.Æ$% Ðconvictions€on€direct€appeal.€€This€Court€subsequently€affirmed€his€convictions€inÐ 0¶&' ÐòòDavid€Charles€Haft€v.€Stateóó,€No.€03C01„9108„CR„00254,€1992€WL€84222€(Tenn.Ð 2¦() ÐCrim.€App.,€Knoxville,€April€28,€1992),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1992).Ð ö3–*+ ÐÌà ` àPetitioner€filed€a€pro€se€petition€for€post€conviction€relief€on€April€19,€1993.Ð Ö7v./ ÐCounsel€was€subsequently€appointed€and€an€amended€petition€was€filed€on€AugustÐ Æ9f01 Ð30,€1993.€€The€petition,€as€amended,€asserted€that€Petitioner€was€denied€effectiveÐ `  Ðassistance€of€counsel.€€After€a€full€hearing€on€the€issues€raised€in€the€petition,€theÐ P ð Ðpost„conviction€court€dismissed€the€petition.€€This€Court€affirmed€the€dismissal€of€theÐ @ à Ðpetition€in€òòDavid€Charles€Haft€v.€Stateóó,€No.€03C01„9411„CR„00400,€1995€WLÐ 0Ð Ð262117€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€May€5,€1995),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.Ð  À Ð1995).Ð °  ÐÌà ` àPetitioner€filed€the€petition€and/or€motion€to€reopen€at€issue€in€this€case€onÐ ð  ÐOctober€30,€1998,€complaining€of€numerous€alleged€errors€relating€to€assistance€ofÐ à€ Ðcounsel,€the€indictment,€the€selection€of€the€grand€jurors,€the€conduct€of€theÐ Ðp Ðprosecutor,€the€introduction€of€certain€evidence,€and€the€jury€instructions.€€InÐ À` Ðaddition,€Petitioner€alleged€that€he€had€failed€to€raise€these€claims€earlier€becauseÐ °P Ðhe€had€been,€and€remains,€mentally€incompetent.€€The€post„conviction€courtÐ   @ Ðsummarily€dismissed€the€petition€and/or€motion€on€March€23,€1999.€€The€post„Ð "0 Ðconviction€court€found€that€the€petition€was€subject€to€summary€dismissal€pursuantÐ €$  Ðto€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€40„30„202(c)€€because€Petitioner€had€alreadyÐ p& Ðfiled€a€previous€petition€that€was€resolved€on€the€merits.€€The€post„conviction€courtÐ `(  Ðalso€found€that€Petitioner€had€failed€to€meet€the€requirements€of€Tennessee€CodeÐ P*ð " ÐAnnotated€section€40„30„217€for€reopening€the€previous€petition.Ð @,à"$ ÐÌà@ggDàò òII.€€SUMMARY€DISMISSAL€AND€DENIALó óˆÐ  0À&( ÐÌà ` àPetitioner€contends€that€the€post„conviction€court€erred€when€it€dismissed€hisÐ 4°*, Ðpetition€and€denied€his€motion€to€reopen€without€conducting€an€evidentiary€hearingÐ 6 ,. Ðand€making€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law€in€regard€to€each€claim€for€relief.Ð ð7.0 ÐÐ à9€02 Їà@ÛÛ.Dàò òA.ó óˆÐ `  ÐÌà ` àTennessee€Code€Annotated€section€40„30„202(c)€provides:Ð P ð ÐÓÓà0 ` àThis€part€contemplates€the€filing€of€only€one€(1)€petition€for€post-convictionÐ @à Ðrelief.€€In€no€event€may€more€than€one€(1)€petition€for€post-conviction€relief€beÐ 8Ø Ðfiled€attacking€a€single€judgment.€€If€a€prior€petition€has€been€filed€which€wasÐ 0Ð Ðresolved€on€the€merits€by€a€court€of€competent€jurisdiction,€any€second€orÐ (È  Ðsubsequent€petition€shall€be€summarily€dismissed.€€A€petitioner€may€move€toÐ  À  Ðreopen€a€post-conviction€proceeding€that€has€been€concluded,€under€theÐ ¸  Ðlimited€circumstances€set€out€in€ðð€40-30-217.а ` €%` €% ÐÌÓÓTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„202(c)€(1997).€€Ð    ÐÌà ` àBecause€Petitionerððs€first€post„conviction€petition€was€resolved€on€the€meritsÐ à€ Ðafter€a€full€evidentiary€hearing,€the€second€petition€at€issue€in€this€case€was€clearlyÐ Ðp Ðsubject€to€summary€dismissal€pursuant€to€the€express€terms€of€the€above€statute.€Ð À` ÐPetitioner€is€not€entitled€to€relief€on€this€issue.Ð ° P ÐÌà@ØØ.Dàò òB.ó óˆÐ $0 ÐÌà ` àTennessee€Code€Annotated€section€40„30„217€provides€that€a€motion€toÐ €(   Ðreopen€a€post„conviction€petition€shall€be€granted€only€if:Ð p*!" ÐÓÓà0 ` à(1)€The€claim€in€the€motion€is€based€upon€a€final€ruling€of€an€appellate€courtÐ `,#$ Ðestablishing€a€constitutional€right€that€was€not€recognized€as€existing€at€theÐ X-ø#% Ðtime€of€trial,€if€retrospective€application€of€that€right€is€required.€€Such€motionÐ P.ð$& Ðmust€be€filed€within€one€(1)€year€of€the€ruling€of€the€highest€state€appellateÐ H/è%' Ðcourt€or€the€United€States€supreme€court€establishing€a€constitutional€rightÐ @0à&( Ðthat€was€not€recognized€as€existing€at€the€time€of€trial;€€orÐ81Ø')` €%` €% Ðà0 ` à(2)€The€claim€in€the€motion€is€based€upon€new€scientific€evidence€establishingÐ 02Ð(* Ðthat€such€petitioner€is€actually€innocent€of€the€offense€or€offenses€for€whichÐ (3È)+ Ðthe€petitioner€was€convicted;€€orÐ 4À*,` €%` €% Ðà0 ` à(3)€The€claim€asserted€in€the€motion€seeks€relief€from€a€sentence€that€wasÐ 5¸+- Ðenhanced€because€of€a€previous€conviction€and€such€conviction€in€the€caseÐ 6°,. Ðin€which€the€claim€is€asserted€was€not€a€guilty€plea€with€an€agreed€sentence,Ð 7¨-/ Ðand€the€previous€conviction€has€subsequently€been€held€to€be€invalid,€in€whichÐ 8 .0 Ðcase€the€motion€must€be€filed€within€one€(1)€year€of€the€finality€of€the€rulingÐ ø8˜/1 Ðholding€the€previous€conviction€to€be€invalid€.€.€.€.Ðð902` €%` €% ЇÓÓTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„217(a)€(1997).€€In€addition,€the€statute€requires€that€theÐ `  Ðfacts€underlying€the€claim,€if€true,€must€establish€by€clear€and€convincing€evidenceÐ P ð Ðthat€the€petitioner€is€entitled€to€have€the€conviction€set€aside€or€the€sentenceÐ @ à Ðreduced.€€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„217(a)(4)€(1997).Ð 0Ð ÐÌà ` à€We€have€carefully€examined€the€petition€and/or€motion€to€reopen€at€issue€inÐ °  Ðthis€case,€and€we€find€no€facts€tending€to€establish€one€of€the€three€grounds€recitedÐ    Ðabove€which€would€permit€reopening€the€previous€petition.€€Thus,€we€cannotÐ ð  Ðconclude€that€the€post„conviction€court€abused€its€discretion€by€denying€the€motionÐ à€ Ðto€reopen.€€Petitioner€is€not€entitled€to€relief€on€this€issue.Ð Ðp ÐÌà@,,Dàò òIII.€€ALLEGED€MENTAL€INCOMPETENCYó óˆÐ °P ÐÌà ` àPetitioner€alleges€that€he€has€been€mentally€incompetent€since€before€his€trial.€Ð  "@ ÐPetitioner€contends€that€this€alleged€mental€incompetency€excused€anyÐ $0 Ðnoncompliance€with€the€requirements€of€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€sections€40„30„Ð €&  Ð202(c)€and€40„30„217€cited€above.Ð p(  ÐÌà ` àIn€support€of€his€argument,€Petitioner€cites€òòWatkins€v.€Stateóó,€903€S.W.2d€302Ð P,ð"$ Ð(Tenn.€1995);€òòJohn€Paul€Seals€v.€Stateóó,€No.€03C01„9802„CC„00050,€1999€WL€2833Ð @.à$& Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€Jan.€6,€1999),€òòperm.€to€appeal€grantedóó,€(Tenn.€1999);Ð 00Ð&( Ðand€òòVikki€Lynn€Spellman€v.€Stateóó,€No.€02C01„9801„CC„00036,€1998€WL€517840Ð  2À(* Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Jackson,€Aug.€21,€1998),€òòperm.€to€appeal€grantedóó,€(Tenn.€1999).€Ð 4°*, ÐIn€all€three€of€these€cases,€the€appellate€court€held€that€mental€incompetency€tollsÐ 6 ,. Ðthe€statute€of€limitations€that€governs€the€filing€of€post„conviction€petitions.€€òòSeeóóÐ ð7.0 ÐòòWatkinsóó,€903€S.W.2d€at€306;€òòJohn€Paul€Sealsóó,€1999€WL€2833,€at€*2;€òòVikki€LynnÐ à9€02 ÐSpellmanóó,€1998€WL€517840,€at€*2.€€Essentially,€Petitioner€argues€that€under€theseÐ `  Ðthree€cases,€mental€incompetency€excuses€all€noncompliance€with€the€requirementsÐ P ð Ðof€the€Post„Conviction€Procedure€Act.Ð @ à ÐÌà ` àIn€the€three€cases€cited€aboveòòóó,€the€petitioner€filed€a€post„conviction€petitionÐ  À Ðthat€was€dismissed€without€a€hearing€or€a€consideration€of€the€merits,€the€petitionerÐ °  Ðthen€filed€a€second€petition€alleging€that€he€or€she€was€mentally€incompetent€whenÐ    Ðthe€first€petition€was€filed,€the€post„conviction€court€summarily€dismissed€the€secondÐ ð  Ðpetition€because€it€was€filed€after€the€statute€of€limitations€expired,€and€the€appellateÐ à€ Ðcourt€held€that€due€process€required€a€tolling€of€the€statute€of€limitations€because€ofÐ Ðp Ðmentally€incompetency.€€òòWatkinsóó,€903€S.W.2d€at€303,€305ð!ð07;€òòJohn€Paul€Sealsóó,Ð À` Ð1999€WL€2833,€at€*1ð!ð2;€òòVikki€Lynn€Spellmanóó,€1998€WL€517840,€at€*1ð!ð2.Ð °P ÐÌà ` àWe€do€not€agree€with€Petitioner€that€these€three€cases€stand€for€the€generalÐ "0 Ðproposition€that€mental€incompetency€excuses€all€noncompliance€with€theÐ €$  Ðrequirements€of€the€Post„Conviction€Procedure€Act.€€Rather,€these€cases€only€standÐ p& Ðfor€the€limited€proposition€that€mental€incompetency€tolls€the€statute€of€limitationsÐ `(  Ðbecause€otherwise,€the€petitioner€would€not€have€a€reasonable€opportunity€toÐ P*ð " Ðchallenge€his€or€her€conviction€if€a€petition€was€barred€by€the€statute€of€limitations.€Ð @,à"$ ÐòòóóIndeed,€this€Court€specifically€noted€in€òòJohn€Paul€Sealsóó€that€dismissal€of€the€secondÐ 0.Ð$& Ðpetition€in€that€case€would€have€been€proper€under€section€40„30„202(c)€if€the€firstÐ  0À&( Ðpetition€had€been€resolved€on€the€merits.€€1999€WL€2833,€at€*4.Ð 2°(* ÐÌà ` àIn€this€case,€Petitionerððs€second€petition€was€summarily€dismissed€becauseÐ ð5,. Ðhe€had€already€filed€a€previous€petition€that€was€resolved€on€the€merits€after€a€fullÐ à7€.0 Ðevidentiary€hearing,€not€because€it€was€barred€by€the€statute€of€limitations.€Ð Ð9p02 ÐTherefore,€this€is€not€a€case€where€dismissal€of€the€petition€and€denial€of€the€motionÐ `  Ðto€reopen€would€deny€Petitioner€a€reasonable€opportunity€to€challenge€his€or€herÐ P ð Ðconviction.€€Moreover,€we€note€that€in€the€three€cases€cited€above,€the€State€eitherÐ @ à Ðconceded€that€the€petitioner€was€incompetent,€òòWatkinsóó,€903€S.W.2d€at€303,€or€thereÐ 0Ð Ðwas€independent€indicia€of€incompetence€in€the€record,€òòJohn€Paul€Sealsóó,€1999€WLÐ  À Ð2833,€at€*2ð!ð3;€òòVikki€Lynn€Spellmanóó,€1998€WL€517840,€at€*3.€€In€contrast,€PetitionerððsÐ °  Ðconclusory€allegations€of€mental€incompetence€are€not€supported€by€anyÐ    Ðindependent€indicia€of€incompetence€contained€in€the€record.Ð ð  ÐÌà ` àBecause€Petitioner€had€previously€filed€a€petition€that€was€resolved€on€theÐ Ðp Ðmerits€after€a€full€evidentiary€hearing,€we€conclude€that€the€post„conviction€courtÐ À` Ðproperly€dismissed€the€petition€pursuant€to€section€40„30„202(c).€€Petitioner€is€notÐ °P Ðentitled€to€relief€on€this€issue.Ð   @ ÐÌà@®®(Dàò òIV.€€CONCLUSIONó óˆÐ €$  ÐÌà ` àBecause€Petitioner€had€previously€filed€a€post„conviction€petition€that€wasÐ p(  Ðresolved€on€the€merits,€we€affirm€the€post„conviction€courtððs€dismissal€of€the€petitionÐ `*!" Ðin€this€case€pursuant€to€section€40„30„202(c).€€Because€requirements€of€section€40„Ð P,ð"$ Ð30„217€for€reopening€the€previous€petition€have€not€been€satisfied,€we€affirm€theÐ @.à$& Ðpost„conviction€courtððs€denial€of€the€motion€to€reopen.Ð 00Ð&( ÐÌ€€€ÓÓà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à____________________________________Ð 4°*, Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àTHOMAS€T.€WOODALL,€JudgeÐ 5¨+- ÐÌÌÌÌÐ à9€02 ÐCONCUR:Ð `  ÐÌÌÌ___________________________________Ð @ à ÐJOSEPH€M.€TIPTON,€JudgeÐ 8Ø ÐÌÌ___________________________________Ð  À ÐJERRY€L.€SMITH,€JudgeÐ ¸  ÐÌÌ