WPC  U.V %bn 0JK 0(U:w@47 0TK 0 0D8 U:| 0^ 0h 0r| 0| 0j 0 1u 0d AMY BB)DCU* AMD D3^ 0XDv~v 0T AOA 0DV D/ B <6X9`(CourierX 3|x:<6X9`(CourierXx6X@`7X@2 0Indent123  ($,  AZ"Arial Regular & e'r(D)e*+,P-E./Ӏڃ"2" 0Indent20 23  (I(2s$  !  XYXXX `   0  (#$  0  ,cAZ"Arial Regular2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23    ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X-$C << G  !  %%   YYY FILED%X October2,1997CecilCrowson,Jr.%AppellateCourtClerk  d% Line 7 d####7Border 1dd<  9p`(Arial-$C << G   !#d#     %     Hayesfailedtoincludethetranscriptofthejuryinstructionsintherecordonappeal,relyingsolelyonexcerptsoftheinstructionsasquotedinhisprosepetition.Theappellanthastheburdentoprepareacompleterecordtoallowthiscourttoreviewtheissues.SeeTenn.R.App.P.24(g).Anappellantwhofailstoprovideanadequaterecordrisksthiscourtbeingunabletoconsidertheappellateissuesontheirmerits.SeeStatev.Ballard,855S.W.2d557,560(Tenn.1993)(citationsomitted).""""'dxd   !#d#     %     Furthermore,inVictorv.Nebraska,511U.S.1,114S.Ct.1239(1994),theSupremeCourtsaidmoralcertaintyinstructionsmaypassconstitutionalscrutinyifusedwithfurthermodifyinginstructionsthatlendmeaningtothephrase.TheinstructionofwhichHayescomplainscombinedthemoralcertaintylanguagewith"letthemindresteasily"language.Asubstantiallysimilarinstructionwasupheldbyoursupremecourtearlierthisyear.SeeStatev.MichaelDeanBush,No.03S019604CC00047(Tenn.,Knoxville,Apr.7,1997),pet.forcert.filed,(U.S.,Apr.28,1997);seealsoStatev.Sexton,917S.W.2d263(Tenn.Crim.App.1995).ButseeAustin,938F.Supp.at131819;Rickman,864F.Supp.at709.(0"$       PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'`Styl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   ion-F Geneva  ion-F Geneva (8$  -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd  ! .   ݛ    \RA'\ќ\RA'\  \RA'\\RA'\%R !$A1-j|`  `@Rߛ  @ INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEÈ@ ATKNOXVILLE @ JUNE1997SESSION̜ SEYMOREHAYES,III,   )      )   Appellant,   ) C.C.A.No.03C019608CR00289      )vs.      ) HamiltonCounty      ) DAVIDNEWBERRY,WARDEN, 󀀀 ) HonorableDouglasA.Meyer,Judge ANDSTATEOFTENNESSEE,   )       )  Appellees.   ) (PostConviction)      )            FORTHEAPPELLANT:    FORTHEAPPELLEE:ARDENAGARTH     JOHNKNOXWALKUPDistrictPublicDefender0   0 AttorneyGeneral&ReporterDONNAROBINSONMILLER 0 0 CLINTONJ.MORGANAssistantDistrictPublicDefender  AssistantAttorneyGeneral701CherrySt.,Ste.300    CriminalJusticeDivisionChattanooga,TN37402    450JamesRobertsonParkway       Nashville,TN372430493 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 WILLIAMH.COX,III0 0 0 0 0 0 0 DistrictAttorneyGeneral       C.LELANDDAVIS       AssistantDistrictAttorneyGeneral       600MarketSt.,Ste.300       CityCountyCourtsBldg.       Chattanooga,TN37402OPINIONFILED:____________________ AFFIRMEDRULE20 CURWOODWITTJUDGE7EXXdXXd7    7   XXdXXd7  @ OPINION   Thepetitioner,SeymoreHayesIII,appealstheHamiltonCountyCriminalCourt'ssummarydismissalofhissecondpetitionforpostconvictionrelief.ThepetitioneriscurrentlyservingatermoflifeimprisonmentintheTennesseeDepartmentofCorrectionforaconvictionoffirstdegreemurder.Inthisappeal,hepresentstwoissuesforourreview: `   `   1.0 Whetherajuryinstructionequatingmoralcertaintywithreasonabledoubtviolatedhisconstitutionalrights.2.0 Whetherthejuryinstructiongivenregardingthedefinitionofmaliceviolatedhisconstitutionalrightsbyshiftingtheburdenofprooftohim.          Followingareviewoftherecord,weaffirmthejudgmentofthelowercourtpursuanttoRule20oftherulesofthiscourt.  ThisisHayes'secondpetitionforpostconvictionrelief.InTennessee,issueswhichcouldhavebeenpresentedinapriorproceedingbutwerenotarepresumedwaived.Tenn.CodeAnn.4030112(b)(2)(1990)(repealed1995);Housev.State,911S.W.2d705(Tenn.1995).Thus,Hayesbearstheburdenofshowingwhytheissuesraisedinhissecondpetitioncouldnothavebeenincludedinhisfirst.Hearguestheclaimsinhissecondpetitionshouldnotbetreatedaswaivedbecausetheyaredifferentthanthoseraisedinhisfirstpetitionforpostconvictionrelief,whichwasfiledonOctober2,1992,andtherightsheassertswerenotrecognizedbyTennesseecourtsuntil1994and1996.@ I   Hayesfirstcontendshisconvictionisconstitutionallyinfirmbecausethejurywasimproperlyinstructedthatmoralcertaintywastheequivalentofreasonabledoubt,requiringreversalofhisconvictionandanewtrialunderCagev.Louisiana,498U.S.39,111S.Ct.328(1990). )   ׀Althoughitisnotentirelyclear,theappellantapparentlybelievesthedecisionsofthefederaldistrictcourtinAustinv.Bell,938F.Supp.1308,131819(M.D.Tenn.1996)andRickmanv.Dutton,864F.Supp.686,709(M.D.Tenn1994),establishedaconstitutionalrightnotpreviouslyrecognized,whichpreventshisclaimfrombeingwaivednotwithstandinghisfailuretopursueitinearlierproceedings.ThiscourtandtheTennesseeSupremeCourthaveconsistentlyrejectedchallengestojuryinstructionsusingmoralcertaintyphraseologysimilartothatcomplainedofhere. +   ׀See,e.g.,Statev.Nichols,877S.W.2d722(Tenn.1994);Statev.Sexton,917S.W.2d263(Tenn.Crim.App.1995).UnfortunatelyforHayes,thecontraryfederalcasesuponwhichhereliesareofnoprecedentialvalue.ThiscourtconsidersitselfboundbythepreviousrulingoftheTennesseeSupremeCourtinNicholsdespitetheadverseholdingsofthefederaldistrictcourt.See,e.g.,Sexton,917S.W.2dat266.Asaninferiorappellatecourtweareboundtofollowtheprecedentofourstate'shighestcourt.SeeBargerv.Brock,535S.W.2d337,341(Tenn.1976).  Asthetrialcourtcorrectlydetermined,HayeshasfailedtoshowthataconstitutionalissuewhichwasnotrecognizedatthetimeoftheearlierproceedingshassincebeenrecognizedbytheTennesseeorfederalappellatecourts. Assuch,theissuehasbeenwaived.Further,theissueissubstantivelywithoutmeritbasedonthesupremecourt'sholdinginNichols.̜  HayesalsoclaimshisconvictionisunconstitutionalbecausethejuryinstructiononmaliceimproperlyshiftedtheburdenofprooftohiminviolationofSandstromv.Montana,442U.S.510,99S.Ct.2450(1979).SandstromwasadoptedbytheTennesseeSupremeCourtin1984,seeStatev.Bolin,678S.W.2d40(Tenn.1984),anditwasappliedretroactivelytoaTennesseeconvictionasearlyas1982bytheSixthCircuitCourtofAppeals.SeeSandsv.State,903S.W.2d297,302(Tenn.1995)(discussingPhillipsv.Rose,690F.2d79(6thCir.1982)).Hayes'firstpostconvictionpetitionwasfiledseveralyearslater.Thus,thelowercourtcorrectlydismissedthisclaim.Hayeswaiveditbyfailingtoincludeitinhisfirstpetitionforpostconvictionrelief.  Thecourtbelowcommittednoerroroflawrequiringreversal.ThejudgmentisaffirmedpursuanttoRule20,CourtofCriminalAppealsRules.      _______________________________      CURWOODWITT,JUDGECONCUR:_______________________________JOHNH.PEAY,JUDGE_______________________________JOSEPHM.TIPTON,JUDGE