WPC48 pv 5CD[h!ٔ 8~E^n+Twue⌂  9t낛>ޟyjgGaLUρ߉()vCOG/kw#8Ҫ$TqfP\DJf 1uZ\JnYcrtf91ߺ_ #5s`#:tT}MMCTUJF$.?/7 9v(kQe"0Di@==ls,R@ h !5B/(00~xaCӸj0[u>)Jeq~ig bq:TLAO H@"tfVixwy@λ1$6yhjr\-JP퓿̽|UB*6+Id_kiZ зyȔ6-tǹVG$ VޙIkϬ"l0H\hU >0 0 0 0 0  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0j 0O 04 0 0 0 0 0 0 0! 0k" 0O# 00$ 0Z% 0<k& 0& 0Y-' 0_' 0R' 07( 07) 0t;* 0*@ e+ 0o+$, 0, 0- 0(T. D+|. AQ.o. Ay/@ 0o$0@ 0o0 B01M1 0]1#1U N3 %4M 4(4N84^ :4wF44J4^4 m`4bw4:4 14 72@5 1ur5 725 0c6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|6|666666666666666666666666666666 AJ7J7 0K7\  `&Times New Roman' IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE BADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THEB0ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE .   2S+P 0_level1  , ;1` hp x (#;23  ..  8.` hp x (#8  2P+P 0_level2  X 8.` hp x (#823  ..  8.` hp x (#8  2P+P 0_level3   8.444` hp x (#823  ..  8.` hp x (#8  2M+P 0_level4   5+` ` ` hp x (#523  ..  8.` hp x (#8  2M+P 0_level5   5+ hp x (#523  ..  8.` hp x (#8  2J+P 0_level6   2( hp x (#223  ..  8.` hp x (#8  2J+P 0_level7  4 2( hp x (#223  ..  8.` hp x (#8  2G+P 0_level8  ` /% hp x (#/23  ..  8.` hp x (#8  2G+P 0_level9   /%< <<hp x (#/23  ..  8.` hp x (#8  2SP 0_levsl1  , ;1` hp x (#;23  Ԁ  8.` hp x (#8  2PP 0_levsl2  X 8.` hp x (#823  Ԁ  8.` hp x (#8  2PP 0_levsl3   8.444` hp x (#823  Ԁ  8.` hp x (#8  2MP 0_levsl4   5+` ` ` hp x (#523  Ԁ  8.` hp x (#8  2MP 0_levsl5   5+ hp x (#523  Ԁ  8.` hp x (#8  2JP 0_levsl6   2( hp x (#223  Ԁ  8.` hp x (#8  2JP 0_levsl7  4 2( hp x (#223  Ԁ  8.` hp x (#8  2GP 0_levsl8  ` /% hp x (#/23  Ԁ  8.` hp x (#8  2GP 0_levsl9   /%< <<hp x (#/23  Ԁ  8.` hp x (#8  2SP 0_levnl1  , ;1` hp x (#;23   8.` hp x (#8  2PP 0_levnl2  X 8.` hp x (#823   8.` hp x (#8  2PP 0_levnl3   8.444` hp x (#823   8.` hp x (#8  2MP 0_levnl4   5+` ` ` hp x (#523   8.` hp x (#8  2MP 0_levnl5   5+ hp x (#523   8.` hp x (#8  2JP 0_levnl6   2( hp x (#223   8.` hp x (#8  2JP 0_levnl7  4 2( hp x (#223   8.` hp x (#8  2GP 0_levnl8  ` /% hp x (#/23   8.` hp x (#8  2GP 0_levnl9   /%< <<hp x (#/23   8.` hp x (#8  6} 4Heading 1XXX  ;1` hp x (#;     e[X` hp x (#eXXX<:Default Para<%% :Body Text In X      X 64Hypertext    <:WP9_Hyperlin    <  :WP9_Body Tex    <Mw :WP9_Block Te   5+` ` ` hp x5   _UX` hp x (#_4S} 2_levnl11  , ;1` hp x (#;  e[X` hp x (#e  < :WP9_Heading1      :>> 8WP9_Heading X     XXX X 0 (2$ 8.!..      :XKXX:XXKXX:XK  ݃ Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5(2$ 8.!..      :XKXX:XXKXX:XK  (2$ 8.!..      :XKXX:XXKXX:XK  ($'dxd*+,-.C<< cWPC r T513%)+.- * *.&Draw Object <<=8C HKKKK3 WPC r T513%)+.- * *5 WPC r T513%)+.- * *  d#|x(r.$..      :XHXX:XXHXX:XHHP LaserJet 40500(uH Z6Times New Roman Regular:X-s 3j1,֤N̩U- - 0#::Xd# D (5hCEKQW]cioAutoList1I.I.I.I.I.I.I.I.FI.3#37=CIQYag1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)Hi)(;3$2#  0  .3  0   Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5_,~. I&mage <=8C HKKKK( $ Figure  1  8.!..      :XKXX:XXKXX:XK  _         ¸XXKEwZINTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  ATKNOXVILLEA¸  November27,2001Session > XKXAAXXK ROGERHARRISv.STATEOFTENNESSEEXKXA  0  DirectAppealfromtheCriminalCourtfor_Unicoi_ԀCounty  " No.4280LynnW.Brown,Judge   -  12o_[$~g  Tp@"0` d` TEY T T@ -  No.E200100782CCAR3PC P  -  14o_[$~g  Tp@"0` d` TE  T T@ -  August22,_2002_ 6     Petitionerappealsthetrialcourtsdenialofpostconvictionrelief.Onappeal,petitioneralleges R  (1)ineffectiveassistanceoftrialcounsel,(2)ineffectiveassistanceofappellatecounsel,(3)he 8 wasunconstitutionallydeniedbail,and(4)theindictmentagainsthimforfirstdegreemurder  wasunconstitutionallyamended.Wegrantpetitioneradelayedappeal,andwestayfurther  proceedingsonhisremainingpostconvictionclaims.    Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheCriminalCourtReversedinPart; f DelayedAppealGranted;andPostConvictionAppealStayed  L   JohnEverettWilliams,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichJosephM._Tipton_and h AlanE.Glenn,JJ.,joined. N KennethF.Irvine,Jr.,Knoxville,Tennessee,fortheappellant,RogerHarris.  PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneralandReporter;KathyD._Aslinger_,AssistantAttorney  General;JoeC._Crumley_,Jr.,DistrictAttorneyGeneral;andKennethC.Baldwin,Assistant | DistrictAttorneyGeneral,fortheappellee,StateofTennessee. b    OPINION  ."~    X  OnJune27,1991,petitionerRogerHarriswasconvictedoffirstdegreemurderand #J" recklessendangermentwithadeadlyweapon.Theconvictionswereaffirmedondirectappeal. $0 # Statev.Harris,No.03C01!9201CR19,1992WL171368(Tenn._Crim_.App.,filedJuly23, %!$ 1992,atKnoxville).NoRule11applicationforpermissiontoappealtotheTennesseeSupreme &!% Courtwasfiled.OnMarch15,1995,petitionerfiledaprosepetitionforpostconvictionrelief. '"& Thepublicdefendersofficewasappointedtorepresenthim,andtwoamendmentswerefiledto x(#' theoriginalpetition.TheStatefiledamotiontodismissandansweronAugust19,1996.Both ^)$( theStateandpetitionerconcedethatthiscasehasbeencontinuednumeroustimesforvarious D*%) reasons. *+z&*  ,`'+ OnSeptember22,1997,newcounselforpetitionerfiledanentryofappearanceinthe ,F(, caseafterbeingretainedbypetitionersfamily.OnSeptember29,1997,JudgeLynnW.Brown -,)- EwZ E8:K:XXdd8D E  wrotetonewcounselinforminghimthatthepublicdefenderwasstillcounselofrecordfor  petitioner.Thetrialcourtstatedthathewouldallowsubstitutionifnewcounselwaspreparedto  goforwardwiththeevidentiaryhearingsetforOctober17,1997.Atthathearing,thetrialcourt | orderedthatthesubstitutionofcounselcouldoccurifpetitionersfamilywouldreimbursethe b publicdefenderintheamountof$500.00.ThisCourtsubsequentlyorderedthatthetrialcourt H couldnotrequirepetitionersfamilytopay$500.00tothepublicdefendersoffice.Harrisv. . ~ State,No.03C019712CR00516,1999WL39503,at*2(Tenn._Crim_.App.,filedJan.28,  d 1999,atKnoxville).Followingthisdecision,thetrialcourtallowednewcounseltobe  J substituted.  0     OnAugust19,1999,petitioner,throughhisnewcounsel,filedanamendedpetitionfor    postconvictionreliefallegingthathesufferedineffectiveassistanceofcounselattrialandon   appeal.Thetrialcourtdismissedthepetitionforfailuretoverifythepetitionbyoathor x  affirmation.OnJuly28,2000,thisCourtreversedthetrialcourtsdismissalofpetitioners ^  petition.Harrisv.State,No.E199902056CCAR3PC,2000WL10381221(Tenn._Crim_. D  App.,filedJuly28,2000,atKnoxville).FollowingthisCourtsremand,theStatefiledan *z  answertothepetitiononJanuary5,2001.Thetrialcourtconductedanevidentiaryhearingon ` March5,2001.Thetrialcourtultimatelydeniedpetitionerrelief.Atimelynoticeofappeal F followedonMarch30,2001. ,     X  Facts   p Xb  Becausewehaveconcludedthatthepetitionerisentitledtoadelayedappeal,welimit t ourrecitationoffactstothosepertinenttothatholding.Trialcounselrepresentedpetitioneron Z directappeal.Atthepostconvictionhearing,petitionertestifiedthatafterthisCourtrejectedhis @ directappeal,trialcounselcametoseehiminthejailandtoldhimthatthenextstepwastofile &v anappealwiththeTennesseeSupremeCourt.Ifthatwasunsuccessful,trialcounselsaidthathe  \ wouldfileapetitionforpostconvictionrelief.However,petitionerstatedthattrialcounsel B neverfiledanappealtotheTennesseeSupremeCourtandneverinformedpetitionerthathewas ( notgoingtofileanappealtotheTennesseeSupremeCourt.    Trialcounseltestifiedthathehadbeenpracticinglawforthirtytwoyearsandthatat   least95%ofhispracticewascriminaldefense.Hestatedthatduringthattimehehadbeen p!  counselinexcessoffiftyhomicidecases.Duetothelapseoftimebetweenpetitionerstrialand V"! thepostconvictionhearing,trialcounselhadlimitedrecollectionaboutthecaseandstatedthat <#" hewasunabletofindhisfilefrompetitionerscase.Notwithstanding,trialcounseltestified "$r# abouthisgeneralcourseofpractice.TrialcounselstatedthathemetwithpetitioneratNortheast %X $ CorrectionalCenterafterthisCourtdeniedpetitionerreliefondirectappeal.Althoughhecould %>!% notrecallthesubstanceoftheconversation,trialcounselmaintainedthatifhepromisedtofile &$"& anappealwiththeTennesseeSupremeCourt,hewouldhavedoneso.Hereasonedthatbecause ' #' heneverfiledanappealwiththeSupremeCourt,hemustnothavepromisedtodoso. (#(  )$)    X 8,', _Analysis   ! X!Petitionercomplainsthatappellatecounselfailedinhisrepresentationofpetitioneron | appealforvariousreasons,amongthemispetitionersclaimthatcounselwasdeficientfor b failingtoappealtotheTennesseeSupremeCourt.Therefore,wemustfirstdeterminewhethera H delayedappealtotheTennesseeSupremeCourtisappropriatereliefbecausesuchreliefwould . ~ precludethisCourtfromaddressingthemeritsofthepetitionerspostconvictionappeal.See  d Tenn.Sup.Ct.R.289(D).  J   0 Petitionersubmitsthatheisentitledtoadelayedappealbecausetrialcounseldidnot    properlycomplywithRule14oftheTennesseeSupremeCourtRulesregardingwithdrawalof    anattorneyofanindigentclient.However,therecordreflectsthattrialcounselwasretainedby   thepetitionersfamily,andtherewasnofindingofindigencyforthepurposesofrepresentation x  duringtrialorondirectappeal.Nonetheless,weconcludethatthedispositiveissueinthiscase ^  isnotwhethercounselwasretainedorappointedbutwhetherthepetitionerwasnotifiedby D  counselthatnoappealwouldbesought. *z   ` WeacknowledgethatStatev.Brown,653S.W.2d765,767(Tenn.Crim.App.1983), F anditsprogenyprovideforadelayedappealbaseduponSupremeCourtRule14,which , expresslyreferstoindigentpetitioners.However,thisCourtreiterated,postBrown,thata  delayedappealshouldalsobegrantedwherethepetitionerisdeniedtheopportunitytopursuean  appealintheTennesseeSupremeCourtthroughnofaultofhisown.SeePinkstonv.State,668  S.W.2d676,677(Tenn.Crim.App.1984)(citingMoultriev.State,542S.W.2d835,838(Tenn. t Crim.App.1976)). Z  @ AsweoriginallyrecognizedinMoultriev.State,the unilateralterminationofanappeal, &v withoutconfirmationfromtheclient,...deprivesthedefendantinacriminalcaseofhisrightto  \ effectiveassistanceofcounsel.542S.W.2dat838.InMoultrie,retainedcounsel failedtofile B apetitionforcertioraridespitetheclearunderstandingwithhisclientthatthisactionwouldbe ( taken.542S.W.2d835,838(Tenn.Crim.App.1976).ThisCourtrecognizedthat indoingso,  [counselhad]unilaterallyterminatedthedefendantsappealwithoutnoticeandthusdeprivedhis  clientoftheopportunitytosecuresubstitutecounsel.Id.Likewise,theinstantpetitioners   directappealwasunilaterallyterminatedfollowingfirsttierreviewbythisCourt. p!   V"! Petitionertestifiedthattrialcounselpromisedpetitionerthattrialcounselwouldappealto <#" theTennesseeSupremeCourt.Trialcounseldidnothaveanyrecollectionregardingthismatter "$r# butstatedthatifhepromisedpetitionerthathewouldappeal,thenhewouldhaveappealed. %X $ However,trialcounseldidnottestifythathehadnotifiedpetitionerthatnoappealwouldbe %>!% sought.Therefore,itappearsthatalthoughnothingwaspromisedtopetitioner,petitionerwas &$"& stillnevernotifiedbycounselthathedidnotintendtofileanappeal.Assuch,weconcludethat ' #' anypotentialappealfollowingfirsttierreviewwasterminatedthroughnofaultofpetitioner.As (#( westated,infra,the unilateralterminationofadirectappealfollowingfirsttierreviewentitlesa )$) prospectiveappellanttoreliefintheformofadelayedappeal.Pinkstonv.State,668S.W.2d l*%* 676,677(Tenn.Crim.App.1984).Accordingly,thepetitionerisentitledtoadelayedappeal. R+&+  8,',   X CONCLUSION    X2    Weconcludethatthepetitionerwasunilaterallydeprivedofhisrighttoseekreviewby | theTennesseeSupremeCourtpursuanttoRule11,T.R.A.P.Accordingly,wegrantthe b petitioneradelayedappealtoseekRule11review.PursuanttoTennesseeSupremeCourtRule H 289(D),thepetitionerspostconvictionproceedingsarestayedpendingthefinaldepositionof . ~ thedelayedappealtoseeksuchreview.  d   J   0             ` 0 0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#______________________________________x (#(#   ' XXAXXK      E1` hp x (#XE&  'F6  ݀JOHNEVERETTWILLIAMS,JUDGE'F67݌ ^  Ќ  XKXA XX  :6 XH.` hp x (#X(#H'^7