WPC QGGde*g-+#8(;HZ/ެZe`d:˨EBC΃9 U"߈Q`0W:6:<CJ,CSBJX-@w2ťG 7>[Vv81ee^=~MV."r{{ ;Lg*JahԳ~-b`h<ܑkǿݚeƝyI-; RX;+@mbŐa #u~QpIXOVw~ѭ0YuNSk#a]fqdH/ h"$ !."0 5Y|ιtUK0BQ %G;Sm0E 0D@Eb 0 B 0 D5B D-w 0K ASB 0 0D Aĩ+ (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman RegularYo)dH3|x C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptU(9 Z(Times New Roman HP LaserJet 4050 Series PCL 60Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 K R$      1  ]  _Thepetitionerraisedseveralotherissuesinthepostconvictioncourt,includingfailureofthestatetoreveal  priortotrialitscompletepleaagreementwithcodefendantSmothers;failureofcounseltocallcodefendantRamsey t asawitnessattrial;failureofcounseltoproperlyconsultwithpetitioner;failureofcounseltoproperlyconsider 8 petitionersmentalstatusatthetimeofthetrial;andfailureofcounseltomakeaclosingargumentduringthepenalty L phaseofthetrial.Weagreewiththepostconvictioncourtthatpetitionerfailedtoestablishanyentitlementtoreliefon  thesegrounds.(#$  0   - -(|G2$ !.8%dd8         0  ] d(|3d$ !.8%dd8     VVVV)!dxdx)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3d$ !.8%dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8%dd8     _  %8T)XXdd8  @tt4%INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @%ATJACKSON#%4 #Ԉ &   AssignedonBriefsJune13,2001 L XT)X% #%XXT)#TERESA_DEION_ԀSMITHHARRISv.STATEOFTENNESSEEXT)X%  J @@ DirectAppealfromtheCriminalCourtforHenryCounty  J @@No.13023JulianP._Guinn_,Judge  6 @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.W200002611CCAR3PC_Ԅ_ԀFiledAugust3,_2001_   AV) ` dE<|` A }     ThepetitionerwasoriginallyconvictedbyaHenryCountyjuryoffirstdegreefelonymurderand x  sentencedtolifewithoutthepossibilityofparole.Theconvictionwasaffirmedondirectappeal. d Thepetitionersoughtpostconvictionrelief,whichwasdeniedbythepostconvictioncourt.Inthis P appeal,thepetitionercontendssheisentitledtopostconvictionreliefbasedon(1)newlydiscovered < evidenceand(2)ineffectiveassistanceofcounsel.Afterathoroughreviewoftherecord,we (x concludethatthepostconvictioncourtcorrectlydeniedpostconvictionrelief.#%XXT)#XT)X% d  Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheCriminalCourtAffirmed#%XXT)#XT)X%  <   #%XT)#XT)X.%JoeG.Riley,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichNormaMcGeeOgle,J.,and  CorneliaA.Clark,Sp.J.,joined.  Teresa_McCaig_ԀMarshall,Paris,Tennessee,fortheappellant,Teresa_Deion_ԀSmithHarris.  PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneralandReporter;KimR.Helper,#%XXT)#XT)X%ԀAssistantAttorneyGeneral;#%XXT) #XT)X%ԀG. ` Robert_Radford_,DistrictAttorneyGeneral;andStevenL._Garrett_,AssistantDistrictAttorney L  General,fortheappellee,StateofTennessee.#%XXT)< #XT)X%Ԁ 8!   OPINION #%XXT)v #XT)X% #L# #%XXT) #  XT)X%    ThefactssurroundingthisJuly1993homicidearegruesome.Thepetitionerandhertwo %$!% maleaccomplicesspentthedayconsumingvariousformsofalcohol,smokingmarijuana,andtaking &"& Valium.Theirvehicleeventuallybrokedown,andtheydecidedtostopandstealthenext '"' approachingvehicle.Petitionerflaggeddownthenextvehicle,andthetrioovercamethenineteen (#( yearolddriver.Thedriverwas_kidnapped_,beaten,shot,stabbed,murdered,andmutilated.The )$) petitioneradmittedtopressingthevictimsexcisedhearttoherlipsandstabbingthevictimsbody p*%* once,butsheotherwisedeniedparticipationinthemutilation.SeeStatev.Harris,989S.W.2d307, \+&+ 30911(Tenn.1999). H,',  4-(- _   `     h      p @# #  I.NEWLYDISCOVEREDEVIDENCE     Atthepostconvictionhearing,thepetitionerofferedanundatedletterwrittentoherfrom t heraccomplice,WalterSteveSmothers,whichrecantedtheportionofhistrialtestimonythat ` implicatedthepetitioner.However,atthepostconvictionhearing,Smothersrecantedthestatements L  hemadeintheletter.Heexplainedthattheletter"serveditspurpose...togetaride.Iain'tever 8  gettingoutofprison.Ifiguredifsomebodyknewthis,Imightgetachancetocometocourt,seethe $ t countryside."   `   Thepostconvictioncourtproperlyrejectedthepetitioners newlydiscoveredevidence.  8  Firstly,recantedtestimonyamountstonomorethanarequesttorelitigatethesufficiencyofthe $  evidenceattrialandisnotapropersubjectofpostconvictionrelief.CharlesHaynesv.State,   C.C.A.No.01C019803CC00142,1999WL126661,at*2(Tenn.Crim.App.filedMarch11,   1999,atNashville),perm.toapp.denied(Tenn.1999)(citationsomitted).Secondly,atthepost   convictionhearingSmothersaffirmedhistrialtestimonyanddeniedthetruthofthefactssetforth   intheletter.Thisissueiswithoutmerit. p     @{ { @@   II.INEFFECTIVEASSISTANCEOFCOUNSEL  4   Petitionerassertsshereceivedineffectiveassistanceoftrialcounselduetotheirfailureto  \ objecttoanincompleteaggravatingcircumstancereportedbythejury.Afterourexaminationof H therecord,weconcludepetitionerisnotentitledtoreliefonthisissue. 4  A.StandardofReview      XT)XXXT)    ThiscourtreviewsaclaimofineffectiveassistanceofcounselunderthestandardsofBaxter  v.Rose,523S.W.2d930(Tenn.1975),andStricklandv.Washington,466U.S.668,104S.Ct.  2052,80L.Ed.2d674(1984).Thepetitionerhastheburdentoprovethat(1)theattorneys l performancewasdeficient,and(2)thedeficientperformanceresultedinprejudicetothedefendant X  soastodeprivehimofafairtrial.Strickland,466U.S.at687,104S.Ct.at2064;Goadv.State, D! 938S.W.2d363,369(Tenn.1996);Overtonv.State,874S.W.2d6,11(Tenn.1994);Butlerv.State, 0"  789S.W.2d898,899(Tenn.1990). #l!   Inordertoestablishprejudice,thepetitionermustestablisha reasonableprobabilitythat, $D # butforcounselsunprofessionalerrors,theresultoftheproceedingwouldhavebeendifferent.A %0!$ reasonableprobabilityisaprobabilitysufficienttoundermineconfidenceintheoutcome. &"% Strickland,466U.S.at694,104S.Ct.at2068. '#&   ThetestinTennesseetodeterminewhethercounselprovidedeffectiveassistanceiswhether )$( hisorherperformancewaswithintherangeofcompetencedemandedofattorneysincriminalcases. |*%) Baxter,523S.W.2dat936.Thepetitionermustovercomethepresumptionthatcounselsconduct h+&* fallswithinthewiderangeofacceptableprofessionalassistance.Strickland,466U.S.at689,104  S.Ct.at2065;Statev.Burns,6S.W.3d453,462(Tenn.1999).    Inreviewingcounsel'sconduct,a"fairassessment...requiresthateveryeffortbemadeto t eliminatethedistortingeffectsofhindsight,toreconstructthecircumstancesofcounsel'schallenged ` conduct,andtoevaluatetheconductfromcounsel'sperspectiveatthetime."Strickland,466U.S. L  at689,104S.Ct.at2065.However,deferencetomattersofstrategyandtacticalchoicesapplies 8  onlyifthechoicesareinformedonesbaseduponadequatepreparation.Henleyv.State,960S.W.2d $ t 572,579(Tenn.1997);Hellardv.State,629S.W.2d4,9(Tenn.1982).#XT)XX XT)# XT)XXXT)  `   Thetrialjudge'sfindingsoffactonpostconvictionhearingsareconclusiveonappealunless  8  theevidencepreponderatesotherwise.Burns,6S.W.3dat461.Questionsconcerningthecredibility $  ofwitnessesandtheweightandvaluetobegiventotheirtestimonyareresolvedbythetrialcourt,   notthiscourt.Id.Theburdenofestablishingthattheevidencepreponderatesotherwiseison   petitioner.Henley,960S.W.2dat579.#XT)XX XT) $# XT)XXXT)   #XT)XX XT)&# B.Analysis  `  p   Attheconclusionofthesentencinghearing,thejuryrejectedthedeathpenaltyandimposed H lifewithoutthepossibilityofparole.Theverdictformrevealedthatthejuryfoundtwoaggravating 4 circumstances.Thejuryfoundthat [t]hemurderwasespeciallyheinousandatrocious.SeeTenn.  p CodeAnn.3913204(i)(5).Also,thejuryfoundthat [t]hemurderwascommittedforthepurpose  \ ofavoiding,interferingwith,orpreventingalawfularrestorprosecutionofthedefendantor H another.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.39-13-204(i)(6).Thetrialjudgerecognizedthedifference 4 betweenlanguagethejurywroteinfindingtheespeciallyheinousaggravatingcircumstanceandthe   statutorylanguage,andthefollowingcolloquyoccurred:   THECOURT:Inoticethatwhereyousetouttheaggravatingcircumstancenumber  onethatyoudonothavetheentireaggravatingcircumstancewrittenout.Isthere  somereason? l JURYFOREMAN:Well,wejust D! THECOURT:Wasitintendedtobethatyoufoundtheentirecircumstancethere? #l! JURYFOREMAN:Well,justwhatI'vegotwrittenout. $D # THECOURT:You'vewrittenherethatyoufoundthatthemurderwasespecially &"% heinousandatrocious. '#& JURYFOREMAN:Yes,sir. )$(   |*%) THECOURT:Youhaveomittedthatitwascruel,involvedtortureorserious   physicalabusebeyondthatnecessarytoproducedeath.Isthatwhatyouintendedfor  ittobe?  JURYFOREMAN:Yes,sir. ` THECOURT:Allright,butthenyouhavefoundthatthesecondaggravating 8  circumstancethereinitsentiretyiscorrect. $ t JURYFOREMAN:Yes,sir.  L  THECOURT:Baseduponthatyoufixedasentenceoflifeimprisonmentwithout $  thepossibilityofparole.HaveIreaditcorrectly?   JURYFOREMAN:That'scorrect.   **SeeHarris,989S.W.2dat31314. p    \   Atthepostconvictionhearing,thepetitionerstrialattorneystestifiedthattheymadea H conscioustacticaldecisionnottoobjecttotheincompleteaggravatingcircumstance.Theytestified 4 thathadtheyobjected,thetrialcourtwouldhavesimplysentthejurybacktomakeacomplete  p finding.Accordingly,theythoughtthatraisingtheissueondirectappealwasthebestcourseof  \ action. H   Tacticaldecisionsbycounselaregenerallynotpropersubjectsofpostconvictionrelief.   Henley,960S.W.2dat579.Regardless,weconcludethepetitionerfailedtoproveprejudice.On   directappeal,theSupremeCourtofTennesseenotedthatthepetitioneradvancednospecific  argumentdemonstratingthatthejurygrosslyabuseditsdiscretionofimposingasentenceoflife  withoutthepossibilityofparolesimplybecausethejuryreliedupontheincompleteaggravating  circumstance.Harris,989S.W.2dat317.Wesimilarlyconcludeinthispostconvictionmatterthat l petitionerhasfailedtoestablishareasonableprobabilitythatthesentencewouldhavebeenany X  differenthadcounselobjectedandthejuryredeliberated.See.Strickland,466U.S.at694,104S. D! Ct.at2068.Thisissueiswithoutmerit. 0"   h+&* Ї@FF% CONCLUSION      `    Weconcludethat(1)thepetitionersclaimofnewlydiscoveredevidencefails,and(2)the  petitionerhasfailedtodemonstratethatshereceivedineffectiveassistanceofcounsel.Accordingly, t thejudgmentofthepostconvictioncourtisaffirmed. #  1       p  `    `     h     ___________________________________ 8     `     h     JOEG.RILEY,JUDGE