WPCD M?[vZwCNŤE ߄'^ˮxt.[TF~v `\@JDmLl[s_[c., dw^#ދ'3ظntص;t`6NĻ!1bM}ن`AJ[2523gC& A$bJ"V <ӇOmxzA! 8h9zέAdpaQ:fSDK^"ORd K¦۩ѷ~R/((LJ/)/r-I" B 3X4=²&Oٗ*c ɲ ]U#t .R4,RXI~e@!BBxT=Z uli:{~yho9zNlRJ |.Ni7_h^{lli{9Z4+? ƑH B3bb- %UA+# F UNQ % 0( U: b w@ 4O c UNr   U:  U: B      D3((( 0D[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[[ AO 0D D/ B'HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLh(9 Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($,|AZ"Arial Regular- - <e=D>?E@AEBCDDӀNuM%3|xQ(hH  Z 6Times New Roman Regular  XCxXXX u? X XCx   Ad FILED XCxX  u?  October12,1998CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerkdAM ,cAZ"Arial Regular XCxXXXu? XXCx   Ad FILEDXCxX u?  October9,1998CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerkdAM ,cAZ"Arial Regular d%%%%'dxd(3$ !  -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd !  D<<D` XX+TR[A' Legal3'A' Legal3'T7TXXdd7      NDr *<,(j 8` `@Ef ` 8ttxP,`  rDNNr*<,(j 8` `@Ef ` 8ttxP,`  rNDDINTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEEATAAUGUSTABNASHVILLEBAUGUSTSESSION,1998  XCxX+CHRISTOPHERHENDERSON#+XXCx#,  )  C.C.A.NO.01C019710CR00493 `  `     h   ) `  ` Appellant,   h   ) X   `     h   ) `     h   )  DAVIDSONCOUNTY X  VS. `     h   )   X   `     h   )  HON.CHERYLBLACKBURN  X   STATEOFTENNESSEE,   )  JUDGE  X   `     h   )  X  ` Appellee.   h   )  (=DirectAppea=>Post>?>conviction>?@Conviction@ClC) X      FORTHEAPPELLANT: h     FORTHEAPPELLEE: 8 JAMESROBINMCKINNEY,JR.  JOHNKNOXWALKUP (  OneWashingtonSquare    AttorneyGeneralandReporter  ! Suite103214SecondAvenueNorth    DARYLJ.BRAND # Nashville,TN37201 h     SeniorCounsel $  `     h     KIMR.HELPER `     h     LegalAssistant `     h     425FifthAvenueNorth `     h     Nashville,TN372430493 `     h     VICTORS.JOHNSON `     h     DistrictAttorneyGeneral `     h     ROGERMOORE `     h     AssistantDistrictAttorney `     h     500WashingtonSquare `     h     222SecondAvenueNorth `     h     Nashville,TN37201OPINIONFILED________________________AFFIRMEDJERRYL.SMITH,JUDGE  X9/1   +OPINION #+# `     X+ X X XD D  ӜD D#XCxX X X##+XXCx# ` OnMay6,1994,Appellant,ChristopherHenderson,pledguiltyto  D especiallyaggravatedrobberyandaggravatedassault.TheDavidsonCountytrialcourtsentencedAppellanttotwentyfiveyearsontheespeciallyaggravatedrobberyconvictionandsixyearsontheaggravatedassaultconviction.ThetrialcourtorderedthatthesentencesservedconcurrentlywitheachotherbutconsecutivelytoatenyearsentenceAppellantwasservinginWisconsin.AppellantfiledaprosePetitionforPostConvictionReliefonJuly8,1996;counselwasappointed,andanamendedpetitionwasfiledonNovember27,1996whichstatedthatAppellantsrightswereviolatedbytrialcounselsfailuretoadequatelyinvestigateAppellantscase,aswellasbymisinformationsuppliedtoAppellantbycounselregardinghisreleaseeligibilitydate.Appellantappealsfromthetrialcourtsdismissalofhispetition. ` Afterareviewoftherecord,weaffirmthejudgmentofthetrialcourt.   FACTS  )T ! H ` Appellantwaschargedwithespeciallyaggravatedrobbery,aggravatedassaultandtheftofpropertyafteranincidentintheDavidsonCountyhomeofMr.andMs.Underwood.AppellantwasadmittedintotheUnderwoodhomeafterheknockedonthedoorandaskedtousethetelephone.ThevictimsoverheardAppellantaskingsomeoneforhelpinchangingaflattire.AfterAppellanthungup,hisdemeanorshifted:Mr.UnderwooddescribeditintermsofAppellant ravinglikeamadman.AppellantcutMr.Underwoodwithaknifeonthecheekandhands.HealsocutMs.Underwoodonthechestandthrewarockingchair D9/1 atherbeforerunningoffwithherpurse.Thepolice,ininvestigatingtheincident,hitredialonthephone,andfoundthatAppellanthadcalledCharlesHenderson.Mr.Hendersonreportedthathehadrecentlyspokenwithhisbrother,Appellant,aboutaflattire.Mr.andMs.UnderwoodlaterviewedaphotolineupandidentifiedAppellantasthepersonwhoattackedthem. ` AppellantwasoriginallyrepresentedbytheMetropolitanPublicDefendersOffice,buteventuallyhiredAndreiLeeascounselinthecase.Atthepostconvictionhearing,Ms.LeetestifiedthatshespokewithAppellantspriorcounselatthePublicDefendersOfficer,butthatshedidnotattempttoreviewanyfilethatofficemighthaveassembledonAppellantscase.Ms.LeealsostatedthatshewasunabletotrackdownapotentialalibiwitnessnamedbyAppellantbecauseAppellantgaveherinsufficientinformationtolocatetheperson.Ms.LeestatedthatherresearchrevealedthatAppellantsdrugusewasaninsufficientgroundforamentalhealthdefense.Ms.Leefurtherstatedthatshefoundnobasisuponwhichtoobjecttothephotolineup.Ms.LeetestifiedthatshereviewedtheStatespleaofferwithAppellantanddidnottellhimthathewouldbereleasedwithinayearofhisreturntoTennesseefromWisconsin.   POSTCONVICTIONRELIEF  0.$&  ` Appellantcontendsthatthetrialcourterredindenyinghispetitionforpostconvictionreliefbasedupontheineffectiveassistanceofcounsel.Wedisagree.Inorderforthepetitionertobegrantedreliefonthegroundsofineffectiveassistanceofcounsel,hemustestablishthattheadvicegivenortheservicesrenderedwerenotwithintherangeofcompetencedemandedofattorneysin 902 criminalcasesandthat,butforhiscounsel'sdeficientperformance,theresultofthetrialwouldhavebeendifferent.Baxterv.Rose,523S.W.2d930(Tenn.1975); P  Stricklandv.Washington,466U.S.668,104S.Ct.2052,80L.Ed.2d674(1984). @   ` ThefirstcomponentofthetestestablishedinStricklandisasfollows:   ` ` 6996Aconvicteddefendantmakingaclaimofineffectiveassistancemustidentifytheactsoromissionsofcounselthatareallegednottohavebeentheresultofreasonableprofessionaljudgment.Thecourtmustthendeterminewhether,inlightofallthecircumstances,theidentifiedactsoromissionswereoutsidethewiderangeofprofessionallycompetentassistance.Inmakingthatdetermination,thecourtshouldkeepinmindthatcounsel'sfunction,aselaboratedinprevailingprofessionalnorms,istomaketheadversarialtestingprocessworkintheparticularcase.` A` 3 ` Id.,466U.S.at690,104S.Ct.at2066.  @ 69Y96 ` TomeetthesecondprongoftheStricklandtest,theremustbea #( reasonableprobabilitythat,butforcounsel'sunprofessionalerrors,"theresultoftheproceedingwouldhavebeendifferent."Id.,466U.S.at694-95,104S.Ct.at h' 2068.The"different"resultneednotbeanacquittal.Areasonableprobabilityofbeingfoundguiltyofthelessercharge,orshortersentence,satisfiesthesecondpronginStrickland.Chambersv.Armontrout,907F.2d825,832(8th 8-#% Cir.1990).6886` ` Theultimatestandardiswhethertrialcounsel'serrors,ifany,weresoseriousastodeprivethepetitionerofatrialwhoseresultisreliable.UnlesseachpronginStrickland 4*, isestablished,itcannotbesaidthattheconvictionresultedfromabreakdownintheadversaryprocess.` #` #68#86 `  8x/1 Proctorv.State,868S.W.2d669,673(Tenn.Crim.App.1992) `   ` Inpostconvictionreliefproceedings,thepetitionerhastheburdenofprovingtheallegationsinhispetitionbyapreponderanceoftheevidence. 0 McBeev.State,655S.W.2d191,195(Tenn.Crim.App.1983).Furthermore,the   factualfindingsofthetrialcourtinhearings areconclusiveonappealunlesstheevidencepreponderatesagainstthejudgment.Statev.Buford,666S.W.2d473,   475(Tenn.Crim.App.1983).ThisCourtshouldnotsecondguesstrialcounselstacticalandstrategicchoicesunlessthosechoiceswereuninformedbecauseofinadequatepreparation,Hellardv.State,629S.W.2d4,9(Tenn.1982),and p counselshouldnotbedeemedtohavebeenineffectivemerelybecauseadifferentprocedureorstrategymighthaveproducedadifferentresult.Williams P v.State,599S.W.2d276,280(Tenn.Crim.App.1980).Inthemattersubjudice,  @ thetrialcourtfoundthatthetestimonyofAppellantwasnotcredibleontheissueofMs.Leesrepresentation,andfurtherfoundthatAppellantwaswellrepresentedbyMs.Lee.Wefindnoevidencetothecontrary.Withoutashowingofprejudice,Appellantisnotentitledtopostconvictionrelief.Procterv.State, `(  868S.W.2d669,672(Tenn.Crim.App.1992).Thisissueiswithoutmerit. ` Accordingly,thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirmed.67 `  `  `  `  ` 7  7 ` 7 `     h   ____________________________________ `     h   3JERRYL.SMITH33DAVIDH.WELLES3,JUDGECONCUR: 9p02 ___________________________________4DAVIDH.WELLES,JUDGE4___________________________________5JOHNK.BYERS,SENIORJUDGE5