WPC FS>ȾId=U6A.y MԄ<]I%x8n->.zշ~W)a~*c'`-bQ[xM9 ĮO}1)ڢ* h9FNo+*)W3hBw'ɧ~o= Y{;2!Chl]?>ەjw`.$*,8VF҄vH`׸~\&}z0g N[LJ}S mQˀ_v6b'  u&?JƊ xۜYuk B_10jeb:PˈE8fg~m˂Ch9ˏރM ąN!͝Lޕ")AbIb 6~U\;#; aQ0v,Pq'cˆn`V3F47nlZ,~bUN\ % 0^ 8wD4H\ zk m # UN   k 1NEb 0     B 0 D3 D- 0K ASb 0{ 0D Ac(hH  Z6Times New Roman Regular(`$.8dd8    Өs+ yG*3|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.wptUHP LaserJet 40500(9 Z6Times New Roman RegularLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 - -(|G2c$ !.8/dd8         0   d(|3Gx$ !.8/dd8     VVVV'dxd)!dxdx( $ Figure  1  ^_X`YE<<CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3Gx$ !.8/dd8     ($$   1  X[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8C HKKKK !.8/dd8     _   /8xXXdd8@tt:u/INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  @WW$ATKNOXVILLE#/:u #Ԉ &    @  @` AssignedonBriefsOctober30,2001 L XxX/ #/XXx!#BILLYJOEHENDERSONv.STATEOFTENNESSEEXxX/  J @@ DirectAppealfromtheCriminalCourtforKnoxCounty  J @@No.71679MaryBeth_Leibowitz_,Judge  6 @@*AV) ` dE<` A   @@TTNo.E200100438CCAR3PC   November19,_2001_   AV) ` dE<|` A }      XxXXXxTheAppellant,BillyJoeHenderson,appealsthedismissalofhispetitionforpostconvictionrelief d withouttheappointmentofcounselandanevidentiaryhearing.Hendersoniscurrentlyservingalife P sentenceintheTennesseeDepartmentofCorrectionpursuanttohis1998convictionforfirstdegree < murder.Followingareviewoftherecord,weaffirminpartandreverseinpartthejudgmentofthe (x postconvictioncourtdismissingthepetition.BecauseHendersoninpartstatesa _colorable_Ԁclaim, d thecaseisremandedfortheappointmentofcounselandanevidentiaryhearing.#XxXX Xx##/XXx#XxX/ P  Tenn.R.App.P.3;JudgmentoftheCriminalCourtisRemanded.  (   #/Xx9#XxX./DavidG.Hayes,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichJames_Curwood_Ԁ_Witt_,Jr.and  JohnEverettWilliams,JJ.,joined.  BillyJoeHenderson,ProSe,_Whiteville_,Tennessee. t PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneralandReporter;MichaelMoore,SolicitorGeneral;T.E. L  Williams,III,AssistantAttorneyGeneral;RandallE._Nichols_,DistrictAttorneyGeneral,forthe 8!  Appellee,StateofTennessee. $"t! #/XXx #XxX/@@OO& OPINION #/XXx #XxX/ $8 $  FactualBackground  &"& #/XXx\ #  XxX/ XxXXXx  OnFebruary24,1998,theAppellantwasconvictedoffirstdegreemurderfollowingajury (#( trial,andhewaslatersentencedtolifeimprisonment.Thereafter,hisconvictionandsentencewere )$) affirmedonappeal.SeeStatev.BillyJoeHenderson,No.03C019804CR00136(Tenn._Crim_. p*%* App.atKnoxville,June18,1999). \+&+   H,', _  OnDecember1,2000,theAppellantfiledapetitionforpostconvictionrelief.Thepost   convictioncourtdismissedthepetitionwithoutappointingcounseltoaidtheAppellant.Thepost  convictioncourtfoundthattheAppellantfailedtostatea colorableclaimbecausetheissuesraised  inhispetitionforpostconvictionreliefhadpreviouslybeenadjudicatedondirectappeal. t    ANALYSIS  L  #  Thiscourthasobservedthatthereisadiscernibletrendtowardappointingcounseltoassist $ t proseappellantsinpost-convictionproceedings,providingopportunitiestoamendpetitions,and  ` allowingevidentiaryhearings.Rickmanv.State,972S.W.2d687,692(Tenn.Crim.App.at  L  Jackson,December1,1997)(citingCarmleyv.State,No.03C01-9305-CR-00167(Tenn.Crim.App.  8  atKnoxville,January13,1994)).Whena colorableclaimispresented,itisrarelyproperto $  dismissaprosepetitionwithouttheappointmentofcounsel.Swansonv.State,749S.W.2d731,   734(Tenn.1988).Nevertheless,ifthereis"alackoflegalmerit,appearinguponthefaceofthe   petition,"thenthepost-convictioncourtmaydismissthepetitionwithoutpermittinganappellantto   conferwithcounselandwithoutanevidentiaryhearing.Burtv.State,454S.W.2d182,184(Tenn.   Crim.App.1970);seeAllenv.State,854S.W.2d873,875-76(Tenn.1993);Swanson,749S.W.2d p at734.Inotherwords,"aclearbutpatentlynonmeritoriouspetitionmaybedismissedsummarily," \ withouttheappointmentofcounseloranevidentiaryhearing.Martucciv.State,872S.W.2d947, H 949(Tenn.Crim.App.1993);seeCuretonv.Tollett,477S.W.2d233,236(Tenn.Crim.App.1971). 4 ̀  ThePostConvictionProcedureAct,Tenn.CodeAnn.4030201to222(1997),requires  \ thatthegroundsforreliefbespecifiedandthatthefactsassetforthmustestablisha colorable H claim.A colorableclaimisaclaiminapetitionforpostconvictionreliefthat,iftakenastrue, 4 inthelightmostfavorabletoanAppellant,wouldentitleanAppellanttoreliefunderthePost   ConvictionProcedureAct.Tenn.Sup.Ct.R.28,2(H).Apetitionsetsfortha colorableclaim   ifitallegesfactsshowingthattheconvictionresultedfromanabridgmentofaconstitutionalright  anddemonstratesthatthegroundforreliefwasnotpreviouslydeterminedorwaived.Rickman,972  S.W.2dat693(citingCarmleyv.State,No.03C01-9305-CR-00167(Tenn.Crim.App.atKnoxville,  January13,1994)).Indecidingwhethera colorableclaimispresented,prosepetitionsshould l beheldtolessstringentstandardsthanformalpleadingsdraftedbylawyers.Allen,854S.W.2dat X  875.Iftheavailabilityofreliefcannotbeconclusivelydeterminedfromaprosepetitionandthe D! accompanyingrecords,anappellantmustbegiventheaidofcounsel.Swanson,749S.W.2dat734. 0"    TheAppellantschallengetohisconvictionisbaseduponallegationsofineffective $X" assistanceofcounsel.Specifically,theAppellantidentifiessixfactualgroundswhichhecontends $D # are incorporate[d]withinthesoleissueofineffectiveassistanceofcounsel.TheAppellant %0!$ contendsinhisbriefthatweshouldremandhiscasetothepostconvictioncourtinordertoprovide &"% theAppellantanopportunity,withtheassistanceofcounsel,toamendhispetition.TheAppellant '#& arguesthatheshouldbepermitted,undertheinclusiveheadingofineffectiveassistanceofcounsel, (#' toraise, )$(   |*%) 8  1.WhetherthecourterredinallowingtheStatetointroduceevidencethatthe   [Appellant]threatenedanothermanwithaknifeoneweekbeforethefatalstabbing  withoutfirstconductingafulljuryouthearingpursuanttoTennesseeRuleof  Evidence404(b)anddeterminingtheissueotherthanpropensityforwhichthis t incidentwasprobative,andconsideringitsprejudicialimpact.`   8      8  2.Whetherthecourterredininformingthejurorsofthereleaseeligibilitydatesand 8  authorizingthemtoweighandconsiderthemeaningofasentenceofimprisonment $ t intheirdeliberation,wheretheonlyissueforthejurywasthedegreeofhomicide  ` applicabletotheproofpresented. L    8      8  3.Whetherthecourterredinfailingtoallowthe[Appellant]tohaveahearingwith $  proofontheissueofthevoluntarinessofhisconfession.    8      8  4.Whetherthecourterredinfailingtoallowthe[Appellants]investigatortoattend   thetrialandnotbesubjecttotheRuleofSequestration.    8  5.Thecourterredinpreventingthe[Appellants]counselfromimpeachingthe \ Stateswitness,BrendaWells,withevidenceofherpriorstatementsunderoath H concerningtheviolenceofherhusband,thedecedent.4     8  6.Whethertheevidencewassufficienttoconvict[theAppellant]ofpremediated  \ (sic)firstdegreemurder.H   However,theAppellantraisedissuesonethroughfiveondirectappealofhisconviction.SeeState   v.BillyJoeHenderson,No.03C019804CR00136(Tenn.Crim.App.atKnoxville,June18,1999).   Becausetheseissueswerepreviouslydeterminedondirectappeal,thejudgmentofthepost  convictioncourtdismissingpostconvictionissuesonethroughfiveisaffirmed.SeeTenn.Code  Ann.40-30-206(1997);Overtonv.State,874S.W.2d6,12(Tenn.1994)(issuespreviouslyraised  ondirectappealmaynotberelabeledandrelitigatedunderanineffectivenessclaim).  l   TheAppellantssixthissuewhichisraisedinhispetitionunderanineffectivenessclaimwas D! notraisedondirectappeal.TheAppellantarguesthathereceivedineffectiveassistanceofcounsel 0"  becausesufficiencyoftheevidencewasnotraisedondirectappeal.Becausethepetitionalleges #l! factsshowingthattheconvictionresultedfromtheabridgmentofaconstitutionalrightand $X" sufficiencyoftheevidencewasnotpreviouslydetermined,wefindthattheAppellanthasstateda $D #  colorableclaim.Therefore,wereversethejudgmentofthepostconvictiondismissingissuesix, %0!$ andremandfortheappointmentofcounseltotheaidAppellantinfilinganamendedpetitionand &"% foranevidentiaryhearingtofollow. '#&  h+&*   CONCLUSION       Basedupontheforegoing,wefindthattheAppellanthasstateda colorableclaim,i.e.  whetherhereceivedtheineffectiveassistanceofcounselforfailuretoraisesufficiencyofthe t evidenceondirectappeal.Therefore,thejudgmentofthepostconvictioncourtdismissingthe ` Appellantspetitionforpostconvictionreliefisreversedasitrelatestoissuesix,sufficiencyofthe L  evidence.Thejudgmentisotherwiseaffirmed.Thecaseisremandedfortheappointmentofcounsel 8  andanevidentiaryhearing. $ t #XxXX Xx #   `     h     ___________________________________      `     h     DAVIDG.HAYES,JUDGE