WPC @-ҿT3N;@is(:,O:piL XV3S9Wo\'9!xƙ*%R\;rr@9 p&E%v~T-qꠞk([Lxkѻ/(@#ġ2\rWph%y'+ Ŵq[W"OkuA3 82 hWzgUF9@9ҍT w cf,kbd1vRRXA폈 H\>Y0F3 ҵ RhEL οl [2j4TޥҞK^Y  V|q Hڋlzmy\|3y?mu%*?&{$$ Ӱ7s'fJ815A e}{[D*J;TۨS FtX3dliLS=R|2Nb %\^ b 0nUNwD4H\ zk m #  _ %NEb 0 B 0 D5i D- 0K ASi 0/ 0D AfX/ (`$.8dd8    ("  Z6Times New Roman Regularb.:i+003|x C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wptU\\IB01S08T\knoxclerk3,,,,0Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5- -(|G2b$ !.8[dd8         0  % d(|3$ !.8[dd8     VVVV)!dxdx)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3$ !.8[dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8[dd8     _   [8XXdd8@tt@[INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @WW$ATKNOXVILLE#[@ #Ԉ &    @  @` AssignedonBriefsMarch19,2003 L XX[ #[XX#GREGORYA.HEDGESv.STATEOFTENNESSEEXX[  J @@ DirectAppealfromtheCriminalCourtforGreeneCounty  J @@No.02CR166JamesE._Beckner_,Judge  6 @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.E200202610CCAR3PC   October24,_2003_   AV) ` dE<|` A }     Thepetitionerfiledapetitionforwritoferrorcoram_nobis_Ԁclaimingadueprocessviolationinthat x  theStatefailedtodiscloseapleaagreementwithamaterialwitness.Weconcludetheissuesraised d bythepetitionerhavebeenpreviouslydeterminedandaretimebarred.Wefurtherconcludethefacts P ofthiscasedonotjustifytollingofthestatuteoflimitations.Weaffirmthetrialcourtsdismissal. < Ѐ#[XX#XX[ (x  Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheCriminalCourtAffirmed  d   #[X4#XX.[JohnEverettWilliams,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichDavidG.Hayesand < ThomasT._Woodall_,JJ.,joined. ( GregoryA.Hedges,MountainCity,Tennessee,ProSe.  PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneralandReporter;KathyD._Aslinger_,AssistantAttorneyGeneral;  andC.BerkeleyBell,Jr.,DistrictAttorneyGeneral,fortheappellee,StateofTennessee. t @@OO& OPINION #[XX#XX[ 8!  #[XX #XX[    ProceduralHistory  #`" 2  XThepetitioner,GregoryHedges,wasconvictedalongwithtwocodefendantsin1985of $8 $ sevenoffensesarisingfromanaggravated_kidnapping_Ԁandaggravatedrobbery.Thepetitioner %$!% receivedasentenceof96years.TheconvictionsandsentenceswereaffirmedbythisCourtondirect &"& appeal.Statev.GregoryA.Hedges,ThomasD.Carter,andTimothyBickers,No.252,1987Tenn. '"' _Crim_.App.LEXIS2217(Tenn._Crim_.App.,atKnoxville,April15,1987),perm.toappealdenied (#( (Tenn.Sept.14,1987).Thepetitionerlaterfiledapostconvictionpetitionwhichwasdeniedbythe )$) trialcourt.Onappeal,thepetitionersconvictionforgrandlarcenywasvacatedbythisCourtand p*%* allothergroundsforwhichreliefwassoughweredenied.GregoryHedgesv.State,No.03C01 \+&+ 9112CR00379,1993Tenn._Crim_.App.LEXIS164(Tenn._Crim_.App.,atKnoxville,Mar.10, H,', 1993),perm.toappealdenied(Tenn.July12,1993).ThepetitionerandhiscodefendantsonMarch 4-(-V _26,1997,filedmotionstoreopentheirpostconvictionpetitionsaccompaniedbypetitionsforwrits  oferrorcoramnobisallegingviolationoftheirdueprocessrightsbytheStatesfailuretodisclose  apleaagreementwithaccomplice,JanieRiddle,theStatesprimarywitness.Thetrialcourt  reopenedthepetitionsbutsummarilydismissedthepetitionswithoutanevidentiaryhearingfinding t thatthepetitionswerebarredbythestatuteoflimitationsandthatthegroundsforreliefwerewaived. ` Onappeal,apanelofthisCourtconcludedthatthetrialcourterredingrantingthemotionsto L  reopen,butaffirmedthedismissalofthepetitions.TimothyBickers,ThomasCarter,andGregory 8  Hedgesv.State,No.03C019706CR00218,1998Tenn.Crim.App.LEXIS998(Tenn.Crim.App., $ t atKnoxville,Sept.25,1998),perm.toappealdenied(Tenn.Mar.8,1999).  `   L  OnSeptember12,2002,thepetitionerfiledapetitionforwritoferrorcoramnobisclaiming  8  theStatesfailuretodisclosethepleaagreementwithkeywitness,JanieRiddle,wasaviolationof $  hisdueprocessrightsunderauthorityofBradyv.Maryland,373U.S.83,83S.Ct.1194,10L.Ed.   2d215(1963).      ThetrialcourtonSeptember26,2002,dismissedthepetitionfindingthatthestatuteof   limitationshadexpiredonboththepetitionforwritoferrorcoramnobisandforpostconviction p reliefandthattheissuespresentedhadbeenpreviouslydetermined. \  H  X  Analysis 4  X/ =TheissueoftheStatesfailuretodiscloseapleaagreementwiththepetitionersaccomplice,  \ Riddle,waspreviouslyraisedinthepetitiontoreopenpostconvictionproceedingsfiledMarch26, H 1997.Theinstantpetitionforwritoferrorcoramnobisattemptstocircumventthestatuteof 4 limitationsbarringsuchreliefbyarguingthatdueprocessrequirestollingofthestatuteof   limitations.ThepetitionersoriginalcomplaintisthattheStatesfailuretodisclosetheplea   agreementwithRiddlewasaviolationofhisdueprocessrightsunderBradyv.Maryland,373U.S.  83(1963).    Althoughthepetitioneradmitsdiscoveryoftheallegedfailuretodisclosein1996,heargues l thatthestatuteoflimitationshouldbetolledundertheauthorityofWorkmanv.State,41S.W.3d X  100(Tenn.2001),andStatev.Ratliff,71S.W.3c291(Tenn.Crim.App.2001). D!  0"  Thepetitionforwritoferrorcoramnobisisbarredbythestatuteoflimitationsifitisnot #l! tolled.Theappropriateperiodforfilingisoneyearafterthejudgmentbecomesfinalinthetrial $X" courtor,ifaposttrialmotionisfiled,oneyearfromentryofanorderdisposingoftheposttrial $D # motion.Tenn.CodeAnn.277204;Statev.Mixon,983S.W.2d661,671(Tenn.1999). %0!$ Ѐ &"% Workmanwasacapitalcasethatrecognizeddueprocessoutweighedtheinterestof '#& preventionofstaleclaimswhennewlydiscoveredevidencemightestablishactualinnocence.Ratliff (#' alsoallowedtollingofthestatuteoflimitationsondueprocessgrounds.Thefactsthereininvolved )$( acompleterecantationofthevictimspriortestimony,thecruxoftheStatesprosecution.In |*%) contrasttothesecases,thepetitionerdoesnot,andneverhasdeniedparticipationintheoffensesfor h+&* whichhewasconvicted.Weconcludethatthestatuteoflimitationsforwritoferrorcoramnobis  reliefisnottolledinthiscauseand,thereforeisabartothereliefsought.    InconsideringtheclaimadvancedbythepetitionerandcodefendantsintheirMarch26, t 1997filing,seekingtoreopenthepreviouspostconvictionpetitions,thetrialcourtfoundthatthe ` groundforrelief(failuretodisclosepleaagreement)waseasilydiscoverable,ifnotknowntothe L  petitioners,priortotheirfirstpostconvictionpetitionandwaswaivedonappeal.Apanelofthis 8  Courtconcludedthatthetrialcourterredinreopeningthepetitionbutdidnotaddressthemeritsof $ t theclaim.TimothyBickers,ThomasCarter,andGregoryHedgesv.State,No.03C019706CR  ` 00218,1998Tenn.Crim.App.LEXIS998(Tenn.Crim.App.,atKnoxville,Sept.25,1998)perm.  L  toappealdenied(Tenn.Mar.8,1999).Weconcludetheissuenowraisedbythepetitionerhasbeen  8  previouslydetermined. $     Inaddition,wenotethatthisCourthaspreviouslyheldthatBradyviolations,aswellas   constitutionalviolations,arenotappropriateforcoramnobisproceedings.SeeHershellLee   Kinnairdv.State,No.M200000037CCAR3PC,2001Tenn.Crim.App.LEXIS596(Tenn.Crim.   App.Aug.7,2001,atNashville),perm.toappealdenied(Tenn.Dec.31,2001). p  \  X  Conclusion  H Z( XL( 4 Weconcludethattheissuepresentedbythepetitionerhasbeenpredeterminedandasan  p allegedconstitutionalviolation,isnotappropriateforcoramnobisrelief.Inaddition,thefactsof  \ thiscausedonotjustifyatollingofthestatuteoflimitationsbarringthereliefsoughtinthepetition H forwritoferrorcoramnobis. 4              l 0 ` 0 ` (#` (#0 (# (#0h(#(#0h(#h(#0(#(#___________________________________X (#(#  `     h     JOHNEVERETTWILLIAMS,JUDGE