’WPC3 2fĀ`§æÜžĶ gś«Łł¢ī&>–攂 Ō‚A¬’ķ1‹",ę'ŻæF_.¢õŌ”²T\÷Hj`D"Ļ_ž'2¬z›±ĮR”9”~JÆĻ(»ÕÓó]±źMę’Üī:¾Ææ”cŗ:Ł-_H§‹äčD$ƒ49ż9݆ĶXŖó4k:ļYģ;,“4äŽĢŃY•µCśNĔ•¶2¬{C}KtЬ›Ŗ8¾Bżp™ƒzš¢—äbn¬ć²6z7FÓ40’™&¶~ZĪ\ėŌg‚acå’ķ¹„÷ž(žcHķW™Šp“ų…u'Žõ©čK; Œ™Ö¾Č‡'—@ ÜĮžM`œwoDĀ®ųÕ十ܲ¢aµ®HóZ(Bg$«qøkb¤r¬CąĶč˘ĖīONŃ¹Śü÷ÆļqHkL’dŪŖgę«·€ĮĻC•ČķŽk.“…˜@‚Ģ”0 1šńŗkŅüäH‡”ĻcN:›œā6FīĀZ¾†ėßöĢō<ļ„—?w{)kõ-¤\O‘/…mALle‚ō¶roœČ‚“—1šO“(āc S7=t)w{Ųńœ­•QĆźo»„²@?ßhØ—ÅFÓšŹ†‡o bU&N\ %Ŗ 0ˆ°^ 8wD4H\ zkŅå· m¹ #ĮŠ 0 D‘ ĘÕ ʛ Ęa Ę'=ķN*f,ņ’E„†J–|ąw\!ĮÓ"<”#Š&Q*Q*eY*8¾,¾,¾,¾,¾,¾,¾,¾,¾,¾,¾,¾,¾,bö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö-ö- 0 ėž-ž-ž-ž- Bé.é. 0¤/ D3Ŗ/ D-Ż/ 0K 0 0 ASU0ĘØ0 0¤n1 0D2 A«V2(ČhH  Z6Times New Roman Regular»(`£Ŗ$””Ń€.ŃŃ8€½­»»d»»d8ŃŃ ż ŃÓ  Ój©T) ÖJ~'(ŗ¦k2Ų„¤3|x ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt"’U‹’ĄĄĄ˜HP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL 6ČČČČČČČČ0(#Ć$ņņŚ  Ś0Ś  ŚóóLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 3Ż ƒR"õ$ŻÓ  Óą  ąņņŚ  Ś1Ś  ŚóóŌ€ō\Å ņ»»ŌŻ  ŻŌ_ŌThe€appellant€entered€guilty€pleas€to€both€premeditated€murder€and€felony€murder.€€The€court€merged€theŠ ° Špleas€into€one€count€of€first€degree€premeditated€murder. \Ż ƒR"õ$ŻÓ  Óą  ąņņŚ  Ś2Ś  ŚóóŌ€ō\Å ņ»»ŌŻ  ŻŌ_ŌAlthough€not€at€issue€in€this€appeal,€a€sentence€of€forty€years€was€imposed€for€the€conviction€of€especiallyŠ ° Šaggravated€robbery.€€This€sentence€was€ordered€to€be€served€consecutive€to€the€death€penalty. čŻ ƒR"õ$ŻÓ  Óą  ąņņŚ  Ś4Ś  ŚóóŌ€ō\Å ņ»»ŌŻ  ŻŌ_ŌSpecifically,€the€jury€found€(1)the€appellant€has€previous€convictions€for€violent€felonies;€(2)€that€the€murderŠ ° Šwas€especially€š šheinous,€atrocious€or€cruel;šš€and€(3)€the€murder€was€committed€while€appellant€was€engaged€in€theŠ n¾ Šcommission€of€a€robbery.€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39„13„204(i)(2),€(i)(5),€and€(i)(7)€(1991). Ż ƒR"õ$ŻÓ  Óą  ąņņŚ  Ś5Ś  ŚóóŌ€ō\Å ņ»»ŌŻ  ŻŌ_ŌWithin€this€general€challenge,€the€appellant€presents€four€specific€allegations€of€ineffectiveness:€(1)€counselŠ ° Šwas€ineffective€for€failing€to€investigate,€identify€and€challenge€the€Stateššs€proof€as€to€aggravator€(i)(5);€(2)€counsel€wasŠ n¾ Šineffective€for€failing€to€challenge€fingerprint€evidence;€(3)€€counsel€was€ineffective€by€making€a€š šhastyšš€decision€toŠ ,| Šenter€the€guilty€plea;€(4)€counsel€was€ineffective,€ņņper€seóó,€because€of€the€systemic€deficiencies€in€the€State€of€TennesseeššsŠ ź: Šindigent€defense€system;€and€(5)€counsel€was€ineffective€for€failing€to€conduct€a€competent€mitigation€investigation,Š Øų Šadopting€a€mitigation€theory€not€based€on€adequate€investigation€and€failing€to€develop€additional€mitigation€themes.€Š f¶ ŠEach€allegation€will€be€discussed€ņņinfraóó. @Ż ƒR"õ$ŻÓ  Óą  ąņņŚ  Ś3Ś  ŚóóŌ€ō\Å ņ»»ŌŻ  ŻŌ_ŌEffective€July€1,€1999,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„23„114€was€amended€to€permit€š š[a]ny€person€who€commits€anŠ ° Šoffense€prior€to€January€1,€1999,€for€which€such€person€is€sentenced€to€the€punishment€of€death€may€elect€to€be€executedŠ n¾ Šby€lethal€injection€by€signing€a€written€waiver€waiving€the€right€to€be€executed€by€the€method€of€execution€in€effect€atŠ ,| Šthe€time€the€offense€was€committed.šš rŻ ƒR"õ$ŻÓ  Óą  ąņņŚ  Ś6Ś  ŚóóŌ€ō\Å ņ»»ŌŻ  ŻŌ_ŌThese€claims€are€identified€in€the€š špetitionšš€as€follows:Š ° ŠClaim€I:€€Ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€at€the€guilt€stage;Š n¾ ŠClaim€II:€€Ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€at€the€sentencing€stage;Š ,| ŠClaim€III:€Ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€on€direct€appeal;Š ź: ŠClaim€IV:€€Stateššs€failure€to€relinquish€ņņBradyóó€material€at€guilt€stage;Š Øų ŠClaim€V:€€Stateššs€failure€to€relinquish€ņņBradyóó€material€at€sentencing€stage;Š f¶ ŠClaim€VI:€€State€knowingly€used€false€testimony€at€sentencing€stage;Š $ t ŠClaim€VII:€Involuntary€guilty€plea;Š ā 2 ŠClaim€VIII:€€Unconstitutional€intrusion€into€defense€preparation€for€sentencing€stage;Š   š ŠClaim€IX:€€Denial€of€jury€based€on€fair€cross„section€of€the€community;Š ^ ®  ŠClaim€X:€€Unconstitutional€restriction€of€voir€dire;Š  l  ŠClaim€XI:€Unconstitutional€voir€dire€rulings;Š Ś *  ŠClaim€XII:€State€obtained€promise€from€prospective€jurors€to€do€their€š šduty€and€obligation;ššŠ ˜ č  ŠClaim€XIII:€The€prosecution€engaged€in€conduct€seeking€to€inflame€the€jury;Š V¦  ŠClaim€XIV:€Unconstitutional€denial€of€expert€services;Š d  ŠClaim€XV:€Unconstitutional€preclusion€of€mitigating€evidence;Š Ņ"  ŠClaim€XVI:€Unconstitutional€sentencing€phase€instructions;Š ą  ŠClaim€XVII:€Unconstitutional€application€of€aggravating€circumstances;Š Nž  ŠClaim€XVIII:€Death€penalty€statute€is€unconstitutional;Š  \  ŠClaim€XIX:€Denial€of€right€to€allocution;€andŠ Ź ŠClaim€XX:€€Inadequate€proportionality€review.Š ˆŲ Š mŻ ƒR"õ$ŻÓ  Óą  ąņņŚ  Ś10Ś  ŚóóŌ€ō\Å ņ»»ŌŻ  ŻŌ_ŌNo€statutory€cap€on€compensation€for€representation€of€an€indigent€capital€defendant€exists€in€Tennessee.€Š ° ŠņņSeeóó€€Tenn.€Sup.€Ct.€R.€13€šš€3(j).€€Rather,€counsel€is€to€be€compensated€on€an€hourly€basis.€€ņņIdóó. ·Ż ƒR"õ$ŻÓ  Óą  ąņņŚ  Ś11Ś  ŚóóŌ€ō\Å ņ»»ŌŻ  ŻŌ_ŌThese€grounds€are€specifically€enumerated€in€footnote€5. 2Ż ƒR"õ$ŻÓ  Óą  ąņņŚ  Ś12Ś  ŚóóŌ€ō\Å ņ»»ŌŻ  ŻŌ_ŌThe€record€indicates€that€the€following€grounds€for€post„conviction€relief€raised€by€the€appellant€wereŠ ° Špreviously€determined€on€direct€appeal:€€(1)€challenges€relating€to€the€voir€dire€of€the€jury;€(2)€conduct€of€prosecutorŠ n¾ Šwhich€inflamed€the€jury;€(3)€unconstitutional€sentencing€phase€instructions;€(4)€presentation€of€false€testimony€atŠ ,| Šsentencing€phase;€(5)€denial€of€expert€services;€(6)€preclusion€of€mitigation€evidence;€(7)€denial€of€jury€comprised€ofŠ ź: Šfair€cross€section€of€community;€(8)€right€of€allocution;€(9)€constitutionality€of€death€penalty;€and€(10)€proportionalityŠ Øų Šreview. wŻ ƒR"õ$ŻÓ  Óą  ąņņŚ  Ś9Ś  ŚóóŌ€ō\Å ņ»»ŌŻ  ŻŌ_ŌOf€course,€a€defendant€may€enter€a€plea€of€guilty€because€of€some€erroneous€advice€of€counsel;€however,€thisŠ ° Šfact€alone€does€not€defeat€the€voluntary€nature€of€the€plea.€€Whether€a€plea€of€guilty€is€unintelligent€and€vulnerableŠ n¾ Šdepends€not€on€whether€a€court€would€retrospectively€consider€counselššs€advice€to€be€right€or€wrong,€but€whether€thatŠ ,| Šadvice€was€within€the€range€of€competence€demanded€of€attorneys€in€criminal€cases.€ņņMcMann€v.€Richardsonóó,€397€U.S.Š ź: Š759,€770„71,€90€S.Ct.€1441,€1448„49€(1970).€€A€plea€based€on€reasonably€competent€advice€is€an€intelligent€plea€notŠ Øų Šopen€to€attack€on€the€grounds€that€counsel€erred€in€his€judgment.€€ņņIdóó.  [Ż ƒR"õ$ŻÓ  Óą  ąņņŚ  Ś7Ś  ŚóóŌ€ō\Å ņ»»ŌŻ  ŻŌ_ŌIn€view€of€the€fact€that€the€appellant€pled€guilty€to€first€degree€murder€and€neither€the€transcript€of€the€guiltyŠ ° Šplea€hearing€or€the€jury€sentencing€hearing€were€included€in€the€record,€any€development€of€the€facts€preceding€theŠ n¾ Švictimššs€death€is€limited.€€For€purposes€of€background€information,€we€recite€those€facts€contained€in€our€supremeŠ ,| Šcourtššs€decision€in€ņņState€v.€Hodgesóó,€944€S.W.2d€at€349„351. .Ż ƒR"õ$ŻÓ  Óą  ąņņŚ  Ś8Ś  ŚóóŌ€ō\Å ņ»»ŌŻ  ŻŌ_ŌņņSeeóó€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39„13„204(k)€(motion€for€new€trial€may€be€filed€for€both€guilt€or€sentencing€hearingŠ ° Šfollowing€conviction€in€capital€cases).- ł-(|G2"õ$¤¤Ż ƒ£Ŗ!ŻŃ€.ŃŃ8€'»»dd8ŃŃ ż ŃÓ  ÓŻ  Żą  ąņņŚ  Ś0Ś  ŚóóŌ€ōKµņ»»Ō d(|3ÖY$££Ż ƒ£Ŗ!ŻŃ€.ŃŃ8€'»»dd8ŃŃ ż ŃÓ  ÓŻ  ŻVVVV'’’dxd)!ČČČČdxdx( ±ž$’’ņ ņFigure€Ś  Ś1Ś  Śó ó^_X`YEž’<<C’’ƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3ÖY$¢¢Ż ƒ£Ŗ!ŻŃ€.ŃŃ8€'»»dd8ŃŃ ż ŃÓ  ÓŻ  Ż($$””ņ ņŚ  Ś1Ś  Śó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8’’’’’’’’’’C’’ HKKKKŻ ƒ£Ŗ!ŻŃ€.ŃŃ8€:»»ddČ8ŃŃ ż ŃÓ  ÓŻ  ŻŌ_ŌŃ  ŃŃ  ŃŌ€¼:»»»ŌŃ8€Q]XXdę»»d8Ńą@ttģąŌ‡īr:ŌIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆŠ ° Šą@kk$ģąAT€NASHVILLEŌ#†¼:»īīr #ԈŠ Š  ŠÓ  Óą @ ąą @` ąJuly€18,€2000,€SessionŠ š@ ŠŌ‡XQ]X»¼:ŌĢņ ņŌ#†¼:»XXQ]#ŌHENRY€EUGENE€HODGESņņóó€v.€STATE€OF€TENNESSEEņņóóŌ‡XQ]X»¼:Ōó óŠ ä4 ŠĢą@@½½ģąņ ņDirect€Appeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Davidson€CountyŠ Ų ( Šą@@ųųģąNo.€90„S„1418,€Walter€C.€Kurtz,€JudgeŠ ¾  ŠĢĢą@@ģģ*ģąßA€V) °°` d€÷E<o` Aߊ pĄ  ŠĢą@@TTģąNo.€M1999„00516„CCA„R3„Ō_ŌPDŌ_Ō€„€Filed€October€20,€Ō_Ō2000Ō_ŌŠ eµ  ŠĢßA€V) °°` dE<0` Aߊ 1  Šó óĢÓ  ÓThe€appellant,€Henry€Eugene€Hodges,€seeks€post„conviction€relief€from€his€1992€first€degree€murderŠ &v  Šconviction€and€sentence€of€death.€The€Davidson€County€Criminal€Court€denied€the€appellantššsŠ  \ Špetition€and€this€appeal€was€taken.€€This€court€is€presented€with€the€following€issues:€(1)€theŠ ņB Šeffectiveness€of€trial€counsel;€(2)€the€post„conviction€courtššs€failure€to€provide€funds€for€expertŠ Ų( Šservices;€and€(3)€the€post„conviction€courtššs€denial€of€a€continuance€and€refusal€to€bifurcate€the€post„Š ¾ Šconviction€evidentiary€hearing.€€Following€review€of€the€record,€we€conclude€(1)€the€appellant€wasŠ ¤ō Šnot€denied€the€effective€assistance€of€counsel;€(2)€the€post„conviction€court€properly€denied€theŠ ŠŚ Šappellantššs€request€for€funds€for€additional€expert€services;€and€(3)€the€post„conviction€court€properlyŠ pĄ Šdenied€the€appellantššs€request€for€a€continuance€of€the€evidentiary€hearing.€€Accordingly,€we€affirmŠ V¦ Šthe€post„conviction€courtššs€finding€that€the€appellant€is€not€entitled€to€post„conviction€relief.ņ ņŠ <Œ Šó óŌ#†¼:»XXQ]#ŌŌ‡XQ]X»¼:ŌÓÕÓĢņ ņTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€is€affirmed.ó óŠ X ŠĢņņÓ  ÓŌ#†¼:»ąXQ]Å #ŌŌ‡XQ]X.¼:ŌDavid€G.€Hayes,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€ņņThomas€T.€Woodall,€J.óó€andŠ Ō$ ŠņņNorma€McGee€Ogle,€J.óó,€joined.Š ŗ  ŠĢThomas€F.€Bloom€and€Patrick€T.€McNally,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Henry€EugeneŠ † Ö  ŠHodges.Š l!¼! ŠĢPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter,€Michael€Moore,€Solicitor€General,€KathyŠ 8#ˆ# ŠMorante,€Assistant€Attorney€General,€Victor€S.€(Torry)€Johnson,€III,€District€Attorney€General,€andŠ $n$ ŠTom€Thurman,€Assistant€District€Attorney€General,€for€the€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Š %T % ŠŌ#†¼:»XXQ]‚ #ŌŌ‡XQ]X»¼:ŌĢÓS ÓĢą@@OO&ģąņ ņOPINIONó óŌ#†¼:»XXQ]T #ŌŌ‡XQ]X»¼:ŌŠ ¶'#( ŠĢņņóóŌ#†¼:»XXQ]Ē #ŌÓ  ÓŌ€XQ]X»¼:ŌĢą  ąIn€this€capital€case,€the€appellant,€Henry€Eugene€Hodges,€appeals€the€judgment€of€theŠ h*ø%+ Šā āDavidson€County€Criminal€Court€denying€his€petition€for€post„conviction€relief.€€In€1992,€theŠ N+ž&,ż¾ Šappellant€entered€guilty€pleas€to€first€degree€premeditated€murder׃ׯ ƒ #ĆŻņņŚ  Ś1Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀and€especially€aggravatedŠ ° Šā ārobbery.׃ ׯ ƒ #ĆŻņņŚ  Ś2Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀€At€a€subsequent€sentencing€hearing,€the€jury€found€the€presence€of€three€aggravatingŠ –ę Šcircumstances€and€imposed€a€sentence€of€death€by€electrocution׃Pׯ ƒ #ĆŻņņŚ  Ś3Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀for€the€first€degree€murderŠ |Ģ Šconviction.׃ ׯ ƒ #ĆŻņņŚ  Ś4Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀€The€appellant's€conviction€and€sentence€were€affirmed€on€direct€appeal€by€theŠ b² ŠTennessee€Supreme€Court.€€ņņSeeóó€€ņņState€v.€Hodgesóó,€944€S.W.2d€346€(Tenn.),€ņņcert.€deniedóó,€522€U.S.Š H˜ Š999,€118€€S.Ct.€567€(1997).€€Š . ~ ŠĢą  ąOn€December€11,€1997,€the€appellant€filed€a€ņņpro€seóó€petition€for€post„conviction€relief.€€TheŠ ś J Šcourt€appointed€counsel€and€amended€petitions€were€filed€on€March€24,€1998,€and€on€June€11,€1998.€Š ą 0 ŠA€hearing€was€held€on€January€20,€1999.€€On€February€8,€1999,€the€post„conviction€court€enteredŠ Ę   Šan€order€denying€the€appellant€post„conviction€relief.Š ¬ ü  ŠĢą  ąOn€appeal,€the€appellant€raises€the€following€issues:Š xČ  Šą8  ąI.€€Whether€the€appellant€received€the€effective€assistance€of€counsel;׃ ׯ ƒ #ĆŻņņŚ  Ś5Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׊^® Š Š  ŠĢą8  ąII.€€Whether€the€post„conviction€courtššs€denial€of€funds€for€expert€services€impingedŠ *z  Šupon€the€appellantššs€constitutional€rights;Š`Š Š  ŠĢą8  ąIII.€€Whether€the€appellantššs€constitutional€right€to€due€process€was€violated€€by€theŠ Ü, Špost„conviction€courtššs€refusal€to€bifurcate€the€evidentiary€hearing;€andŠĀŠ Š  Šā āŠ Øų Šą8  ąIV.€€Whether€the€errors€and€omissions€identified€in€claims€1€through€20€of€theŠ ° ŠVerified€Amended€Petition€for€Post„Conviction,€either€individually€or€cumulatively,Š –ę Šviolated€the€appellantššs€constitutional€rights.׃ׯ ƒ #ĆŻņņŚ  Ś6Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׊|ĢŠ Š  Šā āĢĢą  ąAfter€review€of€the€record€before€this€court,€we€affirm€the€post„conviction€courtššs€denial€ofŠ . ~ Šrelief.Š  d ŠĢĢą@ŪŪ%ģąņ ņBackgroundó óˆŠ Ę   ŠĢą  ąIn€1990,€the€twenty„four„year€old€appellant€and€his€fifteen„year„old€girlfriend,€Trina€Brown,Š ’ā  Šwere€living€with€the€appellant's€brother€in€Smyrna€when€they€decided€to€move€to€Florida.׃ äׯ ƒ #ĆŻņņŚ  Ś7Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀€In€orderŠ xČ  Što€finance€the€move,€the€appellant,€who€on€occasion€engaged€in€homosexual€prostitution€advancedŠ ^®  Šthe€plan,€that€he€would€rob€and€kill€the€next€person€who€propositioned€him.€€The€appellant€discussedŠ D”  Šwith€his€girlfriend€how€the€crimes€would€be€carried€out.€Š *z  ŠĢą  ąOn€the€night€of€May€14,€1990,€the€appellant€and€Miss€Brown€went€to€Centennial€Park€inŠ öF ŠNashville€in€furtherance€of€their€plan.€€The€victim,€Ronald€Bassett,€approached€the€appellant€and€theŠ Ü, Štwo€men€agreed€to€go€to€the€victimššs€residence.€€They€left€together€in€the€victimššs€vehicle.€Ten€orŠ Ā Šfifteen€minutes€later,€Hodges€returned€to€the€park€on€foot.€€Accompanied€by€his€girlfriend,€theŠ Øų Šappellant€drove€his€car€back€to€the€victim's€residence.€€Upon€arriving€at€the€victim's€residence,€theŠ ° Šappellant€advised€his€girlfriend€to€remain€where€she€was€as€he€exited€the€car.€€The€appellant€laterŠ –ę Šreturned€to€the€vehicle€wearing€gloves€and€asked€his€girlfriend€to€come€with€him€into€the€house.€€Š |Ģ ŠĢą  ąUpon€entering€the€residence,€Miss€Brown€observed€the€victim,€alive,€laying€face€down€onŠ H˜ Šthe€bed€in€his€bedroom€with€a€pillow€over€his€head.€€The€appellant€had€bound€the€victimššs€feetŠ . ~ Štogether€with€duct€tape€and€had€handcuffed€his€hands.€€While€the€victim€lay€helplessly,€the€appellantŠ  d Šand€his€girlfriend€ransacked€the€house.€€After€obtaining€the€š šperson€identification€numberšš€of€theŠ ś J Švictim's€automated€teller€card,€the€couple€took€a€break,€drank€a€Coke,€and€discussed€whether€to€killŠ ą 0 Šthe€victim.€€The€appellant's€girlfriend€told€him€to€kill€Bassett€so€they€could€not€be€identified.€€TheŠ Ę   Šappellant€then€went€into€the€bedroom€and,€ignoring€the€victim's€pleas€not€to€kill€him,€strangledŠ ¬ ü  ŠBassett€to€death€with€a€nylon€rope.€€Miss€Brown€testified€that€she€heard€Bassett€moan€and€make€aŠ ’ā  Šchoking€sound.€€She€stated€that€it€took€about€five€minutes€for€the€victim€to€die.Š xČ  ŠĢą  ąAfter€the€killing,€the€appellant€attempted€to€erase€any€evidence€of€his€presence€by€wiping€offŠ D”  Švarious€items€in€the€residence.€€He€then€turned€the€air€conditioner€in€the€bedroom€on€high€to€preventŠ *z  Šdeterioration€of€the€body.€€He€and€Miss€Brown€left€the€residence,€taking€the€victim's€automobile€andŠ ` Šseveral€items€of€personal€property,€including€jewelry,€a€gun€and€a€VCR.€€After€withdrawing€fourŠ öF Šhundred€dollars€from€the€victim's€bank€account,€the€pair€returned€to€the€home€of€the€appellant'sŠ Ü, Šbrother€and€retired€to€bed.€€Š Ā ŠĢą  ąThe€following€day,€the€appellant€learned€that€the€victim's€body€had€been€discovered.€€He€andŠ ŽŽ Šhis€girlfriend€abandoned€the€victim's€car€in€rural€Rutherford€County€and€they€drove€to€Georgia€inŠ tÄ Štheir€own€vehicle.€€The€couple€were€eventually€arrested€in€North€Carolina.€€Personal€propertyŠ ZŖ Šbelonging€to€the€victim€was€found€in€their€possession;€the€appellant's€fingerprints€were€discoveredŠ @ Šinside€the€victim's€residence;€and€Miss€Brown€had€been€video„taped€withdrawing€money€with€theŠ &v Švictim's€automated€teller€card.Š  \ ŠĢą  ąWhile€incarcerated€in€the€Metro€jail€pending€trial,€the€appellant€provided€interviews€to€aŠ Ų( Štelevision€reporter€admitting€to€the€murders€of€eight€persons€including€that€of€Bassett.€€TheseŠ ¾ Šinterviews€were€aired€in€the€Nashville€area.Š ¤ō ŠĢą  ąTestifying€for€the€State€at€the€sentencing€hearing,€Dr.€Charles€Harlan,€the€chief€medicalŠ p!Ą  Šexaminer€for€Metropolitan€Nashville€and€Davidson€County,€confirmed€that€Bassett€had€died€ofŠ V"¦! Šligature€strangulation.€€Dr.€Harlan€opined€that€Bassett€would€have€remained€alive€and€conscious€forŠ <#Œ" Šat€least€three€and€perhaps€as€long€as€five€minutes€during€the€strangulation.€€Harlan€also€foundŠ "$r# Šabrasions€on€the€victim's€wrists€consistent€with€handcuffs.Š %X $ ŠĢą  ąThe€State€proved€that€the€appellant€was€previously€convicted€of€armed€robbery,€attemptedŠ Ō&$"& Škidnaping€and€robbery€in€Hamilton€County€in€1984.€€The€State€also€established€that€the€appellantŠ ŗ' #' Šwas€convicted€of€murder€in€Fulton€County,€Georgia,€in€July€1990.€€The€record€reveals€that€theŠ  (š#( ŠGeorgia€homicide€occurred€when€the€appellant€and€Miss€Brown€traveled€to€Atlanta€after€murderingŠ †)Ö$) ŠBassett.€€After€arriving€in€Georgia,€Hodges€made€arrangements€with€a€male€to€engage€in€homosexualŠ l*¼%* Šacts€for€an€agreed€price.€€Hodges€accompanied€the€man€to€his€motel€room,€but€when€the€man€wasŠ R+¢&+ Šunable€to€pay€the€agreed€price,€Hodges€murdered€him.Š 8,ˆ', Їą  ąAt€the€sentencing€hearing€the€appellant,€the€appellantššs€mother,€his€brothers€and€Dr.€BarryŠ ° ŠNurcombe,€a€child€psychiatrist,€presented€mitigating€proof€on€behalf€of€the€defense.€€This€proofŠ –ę Šshowed€that€the€appellant€was€the€next„to„youngest€of€his€mother's€five€sons.€€His€mother€and€fatherŠ |Ģ Šwere€not€married.€€His€father€was€actually€married€to€another€woman,€but€engaged€in€what€one€ofŠ b² Šthe€witnesses€described€as€an€"irregular€union"€with€the€appellant's€mother€for€eighteen€years.€€TheŠ H˜ Šappellant's€father€abused€the€appellant's€mother€and€was€strict€with€the€appellant's€brothers,€three€ofŠ . ~ Šwhom€were€the€children€of€another€man.€€The€appellant,€however,€was€his€father's€favorite€and€wasŠ  d Šspoiled.€€Financial€difficulties€forced€the€family€to€move€about€frequently,€and€the€appellant's€fatherŠ ś J Šsupported€the€family€only€sporadically.Š ą 0 ŠĢą  ąThe€defense€introduced€proof€to€show€that€Hodges€seemed€normal€until€he€was€twelve€yearsŠ ¬ ü  Šold.€€At€that€time,€he€began€to€associate€with€older€boys,€sniff€glue€and€gasoline,€be€truant€fromŠ ’ā  Šschool,€and€run€away€from€home.€€He€also€engaged€in€sexual€activities€with€his€younger€brother€andŠ xČ  Šattempted€sexual€activities€with€a€female€cousin.€€Due€to€his€behavior,€he€was€placed€in€a€juvenileŠ ^®  Šfacility€in€Chattanooga.Š D”  ŠĢą  ąA€substantial€portion€of€the€mitigating€proof€focused€upon€the€appellantššs€sexual€abuse€byŠ ` Ša€stranger€when€the€appellant€was€twelve€years€old.€€According€to€the€appellant,€he€accepted€aŠ öF Šstranger's€offer€of€a€ride€home€when€he€was€playing€a€short€distance€from€his€home€on€Fessler's€LaneŠ Ü, Šin€Nashville.€€Rather€than€driving€Hodges€home,€the€stranger€drove€Hodges€to€his€home€and€rapedŠ Ā Šhim.€€Fearing€rejection€by€his€homophobic€father€and€driven€by€guilt,€the€appellant€told€no€one€ofŠ Øų Šthis€incident€until€he€was€arrested€in€1990.€€The€appellant€contends€that€this€victimization€becameŠ ŽŽ Šthe€catalyst€and€major€contributing€cause€of€his€delinquent€and€later€criminal€lifestyle.Š tÄ ŠĢą  ąDr.€Nurcombe€testified€that,€while€the€appellant€suffered€from€an€antisocial€personalityŠ @ Šdisorder,€low€self-esteem,€and€substance€(marijuana)€abuse,€the€killing€was€motivated€by€aŠ &v Šsubconscious€desire€for€revenge€for€the€sexual€abuse€inflicted€on€him€when€he€was€twelve.€€This€wasŠ  \ Šcoupled€with€Hodges'€fear€that€his€family€might€discover€that€he€was€engaged€in€homosexualŠ ņB Šprostitution€since€Miss€Brown€had€told€Hodge's€sister-in-law€shortly€before€the€killing€that€he€wasŠ Ų( Ša€homosexual€prostitute.€€The€defense€also€introduced€testimony€that€Miss€Brown€dominated€andŠ ¾ Šmanipulated€the€appellant.Š ¤ō ŠĢą  ąIn€rebuttal€the€State€called€Dr.€James€Kyser,€a€forensic€psychiatrist,€and€Dr.€Leonard€Morgan,Š p!Ą  Ša€clinical€psychologist.€€Both€had€examined€the€appellant€and€concluded€that€he€suffered€from€anŠ V"¦! Šantisocial€personality€disorder.€€They€described€persons€with€this€disorder€as€having€"no€conscience,"Š <#Œ" Šbeing€"self€centered,"€being€"notoriously€dishonest€and€untruthful,"€and€having€"very€little€regardŠ "$r# Šfor€the€feelings€of€others€and€€.€.€.€€willing€to€use€any€means€to€get€what€they€want,€no€matter€whoŠ %X $ Šit€hurts."€€€While€acknowledging€the€complicated€factors€involved€in€antisocial€personality€disorders,Š ī%>!% Šthe€State's€experts€discounted€the€singular€importance€of€the€one€incident€of€alleged€sexual€abuse€inŠ Ō&$"& Šcausing€the€appellant's€actions.€€Dr.€Morgan€concluded€that€the€appellant€"was€in€complete€controlŠ ŗ' #' Šof€his€behavior"€and€not€suffering€from€mental€illness€or€emotional€disturbance.Š  (š#( Šą  ąą ` ąą ø ąą  ąą h ąą Ą ąą  ąą p ąą Č ąĢą@ŹŹģąņ ņPost„Conviction€HearingˆŠ l*¼%* Šā āó óŠ R+¢&+ Šą  ąIn€a€post„conviction€proceeding,€the€appellant€must€prove€the€allegations€contained€in€hisŠ ° Šā āpetition€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence.€€ņņSeeóó€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„30„210(f)€(1997).€€FindingsŠ –ę Šof€fact€and€conclusions€of€law€made€by€the€post„conviction€court€are€given€the€weight€of€a€juryŠ |Ģ Šverdict,€and,€this€court€is€bound€by€those€findings€unless€the€evidence€contained€in€the€recordŠ b² Špreponderates€otherwise.€€ņņDavis€v.€Stateóó,€912€S.W.2d€689,€697€(Tenn.€1995).€€This€court€may€notŠ H˜ Šreweigh€or€reevaluate€the€evidence€or€substitute€its€inferences€for€those€drawn€by€the€post-convictionŠ . ~ Šcourt.€€Additionally,€questions€concerning€credibility€of€witnesses€and€the€weight€and€value€to€beŠ  d Šgiven€their€testimony€are€for€resolution€by€the€post-conviction€court.€€ņņBlack€v.€Stateóó,€794€S.W.2dŠ ś J Š752,€755€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990).€€€Š ą 0 ŠĢą  ąThe€above€standards€are€modified€when€the€claim€for€relief€is€ineffective€assistance€ofŠ ¬ ü  Šcounsel.€€In€ņņState€v.€Burnsóó,€6€S.W.3d€453,€461€(Tenn.€1999),€our€supreme€court€held€that€"[c]asesŠ ’ā  Šthat€involve€mixed€questions€of€law€and€fact€are€subject€to€ņņde€novoóó€review."€(citing€ņņHarries€v.€Stateóó,Š xČ  Š958€S.W.2d€799,€802€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€ņņperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó,€(Tenn.€1997)).€Specifically,€theŠ ^®  Šsupreme€court€determined€that€issues€involving€alleged€deficient€performance€of€counsel€andŠ D”  Špossible€prejudice€to€the€defense€are€mixed€questions€of€law€and€fact.€ņņSeeóó€ņņBurnsóó,€6€S.W.3d€at€461.Š *z  ŠAlthough€we€perform€a€ņņde€novoóó€review€of€the€issue,€the€appellant€must€still€establish€his€allegationsŠ ` Šby€clear€and€convincing€evidence.€ņņSeeóó€€Tenn.Code€Ann.€šš€40-30-210(f)€(1997).€ą x ąŠ öF ŠĢą@d d ģąņ ņEvidence€Presented€at€the€Post„Conviction€Hearingó óˆŠ Ā ŠĢą  ąAttorneys€Donald€Dawson,€Michael€Terry€and€Brock€Mahler€were€appointed€at€the€trial€levelŠ ŽŽ Što€represent€the€appellant€in€this€case.€€Since€his€appointment€in€1996,€Dawson€has€held€the€positionŠ tÄ Šof€Post„Conviction€Defender€for€the€State€of€Tennessee€and€represents€capital€case€petitioners€inŠ ZŖ Šstate€post„conviction€and€federal€habeas€corpus€proceedings.€€ņņSeeóó€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€40„30„302€ņņetŠ @ Šseqóó.€(1997).€€Prior€to€his€appointment,€he€was€in€the€private€practice€of€law€in€the€areas€ofŠ &v Šemployment€discrimination€and€criminal€defense.€€Dawson€also€had€previous€work€experience€withŠ  \ Šboth€the€federal€and€state€public€defenderššs€offices.€€He€had€tried€one€other€capital€case€prior€to€hisŠ ņB Šappointment€to€the€appellantššs€case.€€Dawson€stated€that€he€represented€the€appellant€both€at€the€trialŠ Ų( Šlevel€and€on€appeal,€although€he€conceded€that€he€had€a€minor€role€in€the€appeal.€€Š ¾ ŠĢą  ąAt€the€time€of€Dawsonššs€appointment€to€this€case€in€February€1991,€he€was€involved€in€aŠ Š Ś Šš šmajor€[federal]€tax€criminal€case€in€Memphis.šš€€He€advised€the€trial€court€of€his€involvement€in€theŠ p!Ą  Šfederal€case€and€that€it€would€not€be€prudent€for€him€to€accept€appointment.€€The€trial€court€informedŠ V"¦! ŠDawson€that€the€appellant€was€incarcerated€in€Georgia€and€would€not€be€returned€to€Nashville€untilŠ <#Œ" ŠJuly€or€August.€€The€appellant€was€returned€to€Tennessee€custody€some€time€in€April.€€Because€ofŠ "$r# Šhis€involvement€in€the€federal€case€in€Memphis€during€this€time,€Dawson€was€unable€to€do€anyŠ %X $ Šsubstantive€work€in€the€appellantššs€case.€€In€fact,€Dawson€recalled€that€he€did€not€š šfile€any€motionsŠ ī%>!% Šor€begin€actual€work€on€the€case€until€after€[he]€returned€from€Memphis.šš€€Š Ō&$"& ŠĢą  ąDawson€testified€that€the€law€firm€he€was€with€at€the€time€of€his€appointment€had€dissolvedŠ  (š#( Šand,€in€August€1991,€he€had€joined€another€law€firm.€€The€pressure€to€generate€fees€at€his€new€firmŠ †)Ö$) Šhighly€impacted€the€amount€of€time€he€devoted€to€the€appellantššs€case.€€He€related€that€he€primarilyŠ l*¼%* Šworked€on€the€appellantššs€case€outside€of€his€regular€practice,€on€the€weekends€and€evenings.€€HeŠ R+¢&+ Šadmitted€that€he€should€not€have€accepted€appointment€to€the€appellantššs€case€because€his€financialŠ 8,ˆ', Šconcerns€impeded€his€ability€to€work€on€the€case.€€Notwithstanding,€Dawson€stated€that€he€beganŠ ° Šworking€š šin€earnestšš€on€this€case€in€late€September€or€early€October€1991.€€€Until€this€time,€theŠ –ę Šdefense€team€had€not€developed€any€defense€theory€of€the€case.€€€Dawson€stated€that€developing€aŠ |Ģ Šstrategy€was€frustrated€by€the€appellantššs€public€confession€to€eight€murders.€€Š b² ŠĢą  ąDawson€testified€that€Brock€Mahler€came€on€board€as€third€counsel€in€the€case.€€Mahler€wasŠ . ~ Šresponsible€for€working€on€mitigation€issues€and€psychological€issues.€€Not€only€was€this€MahlerššsŠ  d Šfirst€capital€case,€but€also€his€first€trial€of€any€kind.€€Preparation€on€the€mitigation€theory€began€inŠ ś J ŠOctober€after€the€trial€was€scheduled€for€the€later€part€of€January.€€Dawson€testified€that€this€was€notŠ ą 0 Šsufficient€time€to€prepare€a€persuasive€mitigation€defense.€€Specifically,€since€the€defense€reliedŠ Ę   Šprimarily€on€the€appellantššs€own€statements,€ņņi.e.óó,€he€had€been€kidnapped€and€raped€by€a€homosexualŠ ¬ ü  Šmale€when€he€was€an€adolescent,€there€were€numerous€persons€that€needed€to€be€interviewed€toŠ ’ā  Šcorroborate€these€statements.€€There€was€no€attempt€to€try€to€obtain€records€from€the€GeorgiaŠ xČ  ŠDiagnostic€Center€which€would€have€provided€corroboration€in€that€the€appellant€related€this€rapeŠ ^®  Šincident€to€a€doctor€in€the€Georgia€penal€system.€€Additionally,€there€was€no€attempt€to€obtain€theŠ D”  Šstatements€of€individuals€who€could€have€confirmed€a€change€in€the€appellantššs€character€andŠ *z  Šbehavior€at€the€time€of€the€rape.€€Notwithstanding,€the€defense€team€did€interview€Dr.€Nurcombe,Š ` Šthe€appellantššs€mother,€his€brothers,€and€one€person€in€the€community.€€Dawson€admitted€that€theseŠ öF Šwitnesses€testified€and€helped€establish€the€change€in€the€appellantššs€behavior;€additionally,€he€notedŠ Ü, Šthat€š šjuries€rely€a€lot€more€on€lay€witnesses€than€they€do€on€professional€witnesses.šš€€He€stated,Š Ā Šhowever,€that€additional€witnesses€š šwould€have€made€it€more€real€to€the€jury.šš€€Dawson€confirmedŠ Øų Šthat€it€was€important€for€the€purpose€of€establishing€credibility€to€have€obtained€this€information.Š ŽŽ ŠĢą  ąDawson€emphasized€the€mistake€of€relying€solely€on€a€psychiatrist,€rather€than€hiring€theŠ ZŖ Šservices€of€a€mitigation€consultant.€€He€explained€that€a€mitigation€consultant€considers€the€fieldsŠ @ Šof€sociology,€psychology,€and€other€related€areas€in€processing€information€about€a€defendant€toŠ &v Šestablish€a€complete€portrayal€of€the€subjectššs€life.€€Additionally,€Dawson€took€responsibility€for€theŠ  \ Šcourtššs€denial€of€the€defense€motion€for€funds€for€a€drug€and€alcohol€expert.€€ą x ąą Š ąŠ ņB ŠĢą  ąIn€making€the€decision€to€enter€a€plea€of€guilty€to€the€charge€of€first€degree€murder,€DawsonŠ ¾ Štestified€that€neither€he€nor€anyone€else€associated€with€the€defense€traveled€to€Georgia,€where€theŠ ¤ō Šappellant€was€incarcerated,€or€North€Carolina,€where€the€appellant€was€arrested,€in€order€to€undertakeŠ Š Ś Ša€factual€investigation.€€He€explained€that€the€defense€team€did€not€have€adequate€time€to€conductŠ p!Ą  Šsuch€investigations.€€Additionally,€he€admitted€that€the€defense€team€did€not€file€a€€motion€for€fundsŠ V"¦! Što€travel€to€Georgia€and€North€Carolina,€€a€motion€for€funds€for€a€fingerprint€examiner,€a€motion€toŠ <#Œ" Šsuppress€evidence,€or€a€motion€for€a€forensic€pathologist€to€assist€in€the€cross„examination€of€theŠ "$r# ŠStateššs€medical€expert.€€Dawson€did€admit,€however,€that€the€defense€team€did€present€a€challengeŠ %X $ Što€the€medical€examinerššs€testimony€in€its€motion€for€new€trial.׃!ׯ ƒ #ĆŻņņŚ  Ś8Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀€Specifically,€the€medical€examinerŠ ī%>!% Šhad€testified€that€the€victim€would€have€been€rendered€unconscious€three€to€five€minutes€prior€toŠ Ō&$"& Šdeath;€the€defense€team€subsequently€learned€that€a€person€would€lose€consciousness€in€thirtyŠ ŗ' #' Šseconds.€€Š  (š#( Šą  ąĢą  ąDawson€testified€that,€over€the€weekend€preceding€the€scheduled€trial,€the€defense€teamŠ –ę Šdetermined€that€the€š šguilt„innocence€phase€[was]€hopeless.€€That€there€was€no€way€we€were€goingŠ |Ģ Što€convince€anybody€that€Mr.€Hodges€didnššt€kill€the€victim€in€this€matter.šš€€The€defense€teamŠ b² Šconcluded€that,€in€order€to€gain€credibility€with€the€jury€at€the€sentencing€phase,€the€better€strategyŠ H˜ Šwould€be€to€plead€guilty.€€In€hindsight,€Dawson€related€that€had€they€proceeded€to€trial€at€the€guiltŠ . ~ Šphase,€they€would€have€been€able€to€š šbegin€to€introduce€[their]€mitigation€theories.šš€€He€admittedŠ  d Šthat€he€š šhad€not€done€the€sort€of€serious€legal€research€that€should€have€been€done€on€an€issue€likeŠ ś J Šthat.šš€€Dawson€stated€that€he€was€only€being€compensated€$20„$30€per€hour€in„court€to€representŠ ą 0 Šthe€appellant.€€He€admitted€that€this€meager€compensation€was€considered€in€the€defense€strategy.€Š Ę   ŠAnother€factor€in€the€decision€to€plead€guilty€was€the€intent€to€surprise€the€State€so€they€would€notŠ ¬ ü  Šbe€able€to€introduce€as€much€proof€at€the€sentencing€phase.Š ’ā  ŠĢą  ąDawson€spent€228.1€out„of„court€hours€and€58€in„court€hours€on€this€case,€however,€he€didŠ ^®  Šnot€believe€that€this€was€sufficient.€€He€further€stated,€though,€that€he€probably€spent€more€time€onŠ D”  Šthe€case€than€he€billed.€€According€to€Dawson,€Mahler€spent€well€over€300€hours€working€on€thisŠ *z  Šcase€prior€to€trial.€€Mahler€was€employed€by€the€Capital€Case€Resource€Center€and,€therefore,€didŠ ` Šnot€receive€any€reimbursement€from€the€courts€for€his€work€on€this€case.€€Š öF ŠĢą  ąDawson€admitted€on€cross„examination€that€the€defense€team€had€filed€a€bill€of€particularsŠ Ā Šin€this€case€and€approximately€fifty€motions.€€He€also€filed€numerous€special€requests€for€juryŠ Øų Šcharges.€€He€conceded€that€the€attorneys€had€a€good€working€relationship€with€the€appellant.€€HeŠ ŽŽ Šadmitted€that€the€proof€of€the€appellantššs€guilt€was€overwhelming,€ņņi.e.óó,€the€appellant€had€madeŠ tÄ Šnumerous€public€statements€as€to€his€culpability;€his€fingerprints€were€found€at€the€scene;€personalŠ ZŖ Šbelongings€of€the€victim€were€located€in€the€appellantššs€possession€at€the€time€of€his€arrest;€and€theŠ @ Šappellantššs€girlfriend€had€provided€a€statement€implicating€the€appellant.€He€acknowledged€that€theŠ &v Šdecision€to€plead€guilty€was€a€tactical€decision,€although,€as€he€explained,€entered€without€sufficientŠ  \ Šinvestigation€and€preparation.€€Š ņB ŠĢą  ąDawson€stated€that€the€appellant€commended€the€defense€team€and€thanked€them€for€theirŠ ¾ Šrepresentation.€€He€added€that€the€appellant€never€complained€at€any€time€regarding€counselššsŠ ¤ō Šrepresentation.€€€At€one€point€in€the€appeal€process,€the€appellant€indicated€that€he€wanted€toŠ Š Ś Šwithdraw€his€appeal€and€be€executed,€however,€Dawson€and€Terry€convinced€him€to€pursue€hisŠ p!Ą  Šappeal.€€Dawson€concluded€by€stating,€Š V"¦! ŠĢą8  ąmy€feeling€is€that€we€failed€in€some€fundamental€ways€to€properly€protect€Mr.Š "$r# ŠHodges.€€That,€you€know,€we€clearly,€obviously€from€the€result,€we€didnššt€convinceŠ %X $ Šthe€jury€of€the€mitigation€or€the€weight€of€the€mitigation€that€we€presented.€€And€IŠ ī%>!% Šbelieve€that€there€is,€there€are€things€that€we€should€have€done€in€terms€of€additionalŠ Ō&$"& Šinvestigation€that€would€have€made€that€mitigation€case€stronger,€to€the€extent€thatŠ ŗ' #' Šwe€had€a€duty€to€do€those€things€and€to€prepare€the€mitigation,€to€come€up€with€aŠ  (š#( Šmore,€I€guess,€compelling€theory.€€Not€theory€but€manner€in€which€we€presented€theŠ †)Ö$) Šcase,€this€would€be€through€putting€it€on€as€a€guilty„innocence€case€first.€€ThenŠ l*¼%* Šā āstarting€out€mitigation,€there€and€continuing€it€into€the€sentencing€phase,€that€weŠ R+¢&+ Šfailed€in€some€fundamental€ways€that€had€we€done€sufficient€legal€research€andŠ ° Šinvestigation,€we€would€not€have€made€those€errors.€.€.€.Š–ęŠ Š  Šā āĢą  ąMichael€Terry€was€appointed€to€represent€the€appellant€in€April€or€June€1991.€€€At€the€timeŠ b² Šof€his€appointment,€he€had€tried€one€capital€case€to€conclusion€and€was€involved€in€anotherŠ H˜ Šexhausting€capital€case€which€was€tried€for€three€weeks€in€July€1991.€Š . ~ ŠĢą  ąTerry€stated€that€after€the€appellant€was€returned€to€Nashville,€he€started€giving€interviewsŠ ś J Što€the€local€news€stations€describing€himself€as€a€serial€killer.€€Terry€advised€the€appellant€to€stopŠ ą 0 Šgiving€interviews.€€Notwithstanding€these€initial€consultations,€Terry€stated€that€he€did€not€actuallyŠ Ę   Šstart€working€on€the€appellantššs€case€until€August.€€The€appellantššs€trial€began€in€January€1992.€Š ¬ ü  ŠTerry€concluded€that€the€period€from€August€to€January€was€insufficient€time€to€prepare€for€trial.€Š ’ā  ŠHe€stated€that€in€order€to€effectively€represent€a€defendant€charged€with€a€capital€crime,€he€wouldŠ xČ  Šneed€to€devote€six€months€solely€to€that€case.€€Indeed,€he€stated€that€anywhere€between€1500€andŠ ^®  Š1800€hours€are€š šrequired€to€be€effective€in€[capital]€cases.€€And€short€of€that€is€not€effectiveŠ D”  Šrepresentation.šš€€He€claimed€that€he€spent€256€out„of„court€hours€and€69.5€in„court€hours€for€hisŠ *z  Šwork€on€this€case.€€Terry€explained€that,€during€this€time,€the€fees€paid€to€appointed€counselŠ ` Šrepresenting€indigent€appellants€resulted€in€a€financial€strain€for€himself.€€€He€stated€the€$20€per€hourŠ öF Špaid€in€appointed€cases€for€indigent€defendants€was€š šnot€going€to€get€you€effective€assistance€in€thisŠ Ü, Škind€of€case.ššŠ Ā ŠĢą  ąTerry€testified€that€he€cross„examined€Dr.€Harlan€during€the€sentencing€hearing.€€€TerryŠ ŽŽ Šconceded€that€he€had€never€talked€with€Dr.€Harlan€until€immediately€prior€to€his€testimony€at€theŠ tÄ Šsentencing€hearing€and€admitted€that€he€should€have€been€more€prepared€for€Dr.€Harlanššs€testimony.€Š ZŖ ŠHe€explained€that€he€did€not€question€Dr.€Harlan€prior€to€trial€because€š š[w]e€didnššt€think€that€thereŠ @ Šwas€any€issue€about€the€cause€of€death.€€And€we€did€not€anticipate€that€Harlan€would€exaggerate€thatŠ &v Štime€to€four€minutes.šš€€Notwithstanding,€Terry€elicited€from€Harlan€on€cross„examination€that€it€wasŠ  \ Špossible€that€the€victim€was€conscious€for€less€than€three€minutes.€€Moreover,€at€the€motion€for€newŠ ņB Štrial,€the€defense€team€unsuccessfully€attempted€to€attack€the€veracity€of€Dr.€Harlanššs€testimonyŠ Ų( Šbased€upon€evidence€that€the€victim€would€not€have€been€conscious€for€more€than€30€seconds.€€TerryŠ ¾ Šadmitted€that€he€was€unprepared;€he€should€have€vigorously€cross„examined€Harlan;€he€should€haveŠ ¤ō Šinterviewed€him€prior€to€trial;€and€he€should€have€obtained€a€forensic€pathologist€to€rebut€HarlanššsŠ Š Ś Štestimony.Š p!Ą  Š€Ģą  ąRegarding€the€appellantššs€entry€of€a€guilty€plea,€Terry€admitted€that€the€decision€was€madeŠ <#Œ" Šthe€week€prior€to€trial.€€€He€stated€that€the€decision€was,€in€part,€to€be€a€demonstration€of€remorse€forŠ "$r# Šthe€jury.€€€Reflecting€upon€this€decision,€Terry€opined€that€pleading€guilty€was€a€mistake€for€severalŠ %X $ Šreasons.€€Expounding€upon€this€conclusion,€Terry€testified€that€they€surprised€the€court,€theŠ ī%>!% Šprosecutor,€and€the€jury€by€pleading€guilty.€€He€explained€that€they€should€have€at€least€š špitch[ed]Š Ō&$"& Ša€fight.šš€€Š ŗ' #' ŠĢą  ąWhen€Brock€Mahler€was€appointed€as€the€third€attorney€in€this€case,€he€was€employed€as€aŠ †)Ö$) Šstaff€attorney€by€the€Capital€Case€Resource€Center.€€€He€officially€began€working€with€the€defenseŠ l*¼%* Šteam€in€November€although€he€had€been€consulted€in€October.€€Mahler€testified€that€he€initiated€theŠ R+¢&+ Šinvestigation€regarding€mitigation€evidence.€€Mahler€testified€that€Susan€Canon€had€been€retainedŠ 8,ˆ', Šas€the€mitigation€investigator€in€this€case;€specifically,€she€had€been€approved€as€of€September€9ņņthóó.€Š ° ŠMahler€explained,€however,€that€it€was€not€until€the€end€of€October€when€Mahler€personally€broughtŠ –ę ŠCanon€to€meet€the€appellant€that€an€initial€interview€was€conducted.€€A€short€time€thereafter,€CanonŠ |Ģ Šinformed€Mahler€that€she€had€to€withdraw€from€the€case.€€Ann€Charvet€was€then€contacted€as€aŠ b² Šsubstitute€for€Canon.€€Although€the€mitigation€investigator€did€spend€roughly€77€hours€preparing€forŠ H˜ Šthis€case,€Mahler€stated€š š[t]hatššs€laughable.€€Typically€a€mitigation€investigation€is€in€excess€of€300Š . ~ Šhours.šš€€Thus,€as€of€November,€nothing€had€been€done€on€the€appellantššs€case€except€that€anŠ  d Ševaluation€by€a€mental€health€expert€had€been€performed€and€the€defense€team€had€obtained€someŠ ś J Šof€the€appellantššs€hospitalization€records.€€Mahler€testified€that€two€months€was€not€enough€time€toŠ ą 0 Šthoroughly€prepare€for€trial.€€Although€Mahler€believed€that€they€had€a€fairly€compelling€psychiatricŠ Ę   Šexplanation,€they€needed€to€introduce€more€law€and€expert€witnesses€to€buttress€their€story€beforeŠ ¬ ü  Šthe€jury.€€Mahler€testified€that,€if€he€had€more€time,€he€would€have€involved€Dr.€Pamela€Auble,€whoŠ ’ā  Šhad€evaluated€the€appellant,€as€a€witness.€€He€also€mentioned€that€Dr.€Ken€Anchor,€who€hadŠ xČ  Ševaluated€the€appellant€as€a€juvenile,€should€have€been€a€witness,€as€he€could€have€corroborated€theŠ ^®  Šfact€that€the€appellant€did€show€symptoms€of€a€person€with€at€least€a€sexual€identity€disorder.€Š D”  ŠMahler€stated€that€a€drug€and€alcohol€expert€was€necessary€as€well€as€a€social€worker.€€€€MahlerŠ *z  Šadmitted€that€motions€for€continuances€were€sought,€but€denied.€€Š ` ŠĢą  ąRegarding€the€penalty€phase€of€the€trial,€Mahler€testified€that€he€was€to€deal€with€theŠ Ü, Špsychiatric€proof;€Dawson€was€to€deal€with€lay€witnesses€and€direct€examination;€and€Terry€was€toŠ Ā Šdeal€with€cross„examination€of€the€Stateššs€witnesses.€€Despite€this€plan,€Mahler€felt€that€the€defenseŠ Øų Šteam€was€not€integrated.€€Dawson€and€Terry€were€pulled€from€their€private€practices;€so€most€of€theŠ ŽŽ Šwork€was€done€on€the€weekends.€€Mahler€testified€that€he€had€urged€Terry€to€be€prepared€to€cross„Š tÄ Šexamine€Dr.€Harlan,€including€š šbon[ing]€up€on€some€medical€treatises.€.€.€.šš€€Mahler€opined€thatŠ ZŖ ŠTerry€š šneeded€to€inform€himself€about€the€medical€aspects€of€ligature€strangulation€to€be€preparedŠ @ Što€cross„examine€Dr.€Harlan.šš€€In€fact,€Mahler€stated€that€an€independent€forensic€pathologist€shouldŠ &v Šhave€been€consulted€to€rebut€Dr.€Harlanššs€opinion€regarding€the€length€of€time€the€victim€remainedŠ  \ Šconscious.€€€Mahler€attempted€unsuccessfully€to€challenge€Dr.€Harlanššs€testimony€in€the€motion€forŠ ņB Šnew€trial.€€Indeed,€Mahler€testified€that€there€was€information€to€support€the€defenseššs€position€thatŠ Ų( Šconsciousness€could€not€have€lasted€as€long€as€Dr.€Harlan€testified.€€Specifically,€Mahler€stated€thatŠ ¾ Šthere€was€an€affidavit€by€Dr.€Sperry€stating€that€loss€of€consciousness€would€have€been€very€rapidŠ ¤ō Šand€there€was€testimony€from€another€case€where€the€defense€had€effectively€cross„examined€Dr.Š Š Ś ŠHarlan€as€to€ligature€strangulation.Š p!Ą  ŠĢą  ąMahler€took€issue€with€the€appellate€courtššs€opinion€that€the€š šheinous,€atrocious,€cruelšš€factorŠ <#Œ" Šfocused€upon€š šmental€torture€because€the€victim€was€helpless.šš€€Mahler€stated€that€he€never€got€thatŠ "$r# Šimpression.€€Rather,€Mahler€testified€that€he€was€of€the€opinion€that€š šMr.€Bassett€was€involved€inŠ %X $ Šbeing€robbed.€€One€does€not€presume€in€the€course€of€a€robbery€that€one€is€going€to€be€killed.šš€€HeŠ ī%>!% Šfurther€criticized€the€Court€of€Criminal€Appealsšš€opinion,€concluding€its€findings€inconsistentŠ Ō&$"& Šbecause€Mr.€Bassett€had€a€pillow€over€his€head€and€was€in€another€room.€€Mahler€noted€that,€givenŠ ŗ' #' Šthese€facts,€the€victim€would€not€have€been€able€to€overhear€what€the€appellant€and€Brown€wereŠ  (š#( Šplanning€to€do€with€him.Š †)Ö$) ŠĢą  ąMahler€estimated€that€he€spent€about€500€hours€on€this€case,€including€both€trial€and€appealŠ R+¢&+ Špreparation.€€Additionally,€he€testified€that,€in€his€opinion,€Dawson€and€Terryššs€š šperformance€wasŠ 8,ˆ', Šcertainly€deficient.šš€€He€explained€that€they€did€not€do€anything€on€this€case€until€š šjust€near€the€endšš;Š ° Šš š[t]hey€relied€on€[Mahler]€to€prepare€this€case€for€them.ššŠ –ę ŠĢą  ąDr.€Ann€Charvet,€a€clinical€sociologist,€assisted€defense€counsel€with€the€mitigation€aspectŠ b² Šof€the€case.€€€€Charvet€testified€that€she€began€work€on€this€case€during€the€first€week€of€DecemberŠ H˜ Š1991.€€The€trial€began€in€January€1992.€€She€was€compensated€for€77€hours€worked€on€this€case.€Š . ~ ŠCharvet€admitted€that€she€had€submitted€a€supplementary€invoice€for€an€additional€75€hours,Š  d Šhowever,€she€was€never€compensated€for€this€time.€€She€stated€that€this€was€not€sufficient€time€forŠ ś J Šher€to€perform€her€function€as€a€mitigation€investigator.€€Specifically,€she€explained€that€a€major€partŠ ą 0 Šof€her€investigation€involved€the€compilation€of€various€documents€relating€to€the€appellantššs€lifeŠ Ę   Šand€this€aspect€of€the€investigation€is€very€time€consuming.€€Š ¬ ü  ŠĢą  ąIn€the€present€case,€Charvet€interviewed€the€primary€witnesses,€ņņi.e.óó,€the€appellantššs€mother,Š xČ  Šstepfather,€a€brother,€a€sister„in„law,€and€some€friends.€€Other€primary€witnesses,€the€appellantššsŠ ^®  Šbrothers,€were€resistant€to€being€interviewed.€€She€was€not€successful€in€locating€family€membersŠ D”  Šfrom€the€appellantššs€fatherššs€side€of€the€family.€€Charvet€testified€that,€had€she€had€more€time,€sheŠ *z  Šwould€have€found€secondary€witnesses€who€could€have€š šidentif[ied]€and€validat[ed]€the€conditionsŠ ` Šin€the€home.šš€€Their€testimony€serves€to€make€the€testimony€of€the€primary€witnesses€more€credible.€Š öF ŠShe€explained€that€a€lead€attorney€was€not€designated€within€the€defense€team.€€This€resulted€inŠ Ü, Šconfusion€and,€in€her€opinion,€her€information€was€not€being€properly€utilized.€€She€also€feltŠ Ā Šrestricted€in€her€investigation.€€For€example,€she€was€not€able€to€review€all€of€the€records€the€defenseŠ Øų Šteam€had€obtained€prior€to€her€involvement€in€the€case.€€Had€Dr.€Charvet€been€provided€either€moreŠ ŽŽ Štime€to€prepare€or€additional€financial€resources,€š š[she]€would€have€sought€witnesses€to€tell€a€moreŠ tÄ Šcomplete€story€of€who€is€Henry€Hodges.€€[She]€would€have€sought€the€humanization€of€him.€€[She]Š ZŖ Šwould€have€primarily€tried€to€identify€more€clearly€the€conflict€that€he€faced€in€coming€to€grips€withŠ @ Šhis€own€sexuality.šš€€She€testified€that,€had€she€been€provided€sufficient€time,€she€would€haveŠ &v Šinterviewed€counselors€and€mental€health€people€and€she€would€have€interviewed€prisoners€withŠ  \ Šwhom€the€appellant€had€been€incarcerated.Š ņB ŠĢą  ąDavid€J.€Keefe,€chief€counsel€with€the€capital€division€of€the€Tennessee€District€PublicŠ ¾ ŠDefenderššs€Conference,€reviewed€the€representation€provided€by€counsel€in€the€present€case€andŠ ¤ō Štestified€on€the€appellantššs€behalf€at€the€post„conviction€hearing.€€Based€on€his€review,€Keefe€opinedŠ Š Ś Šthat€the€appellantššs€attorneys€were€deficient€in€their€representation€of€the€appellant.€€He€suggestedŠ p!Ą  Šthat€the€attorneys€should€not€have€accepted€appointment€unless€they€were€able€to€devote€all€or€aŠ V"¦! Šsubstantial€portion€of€their€time€to€the€matter.€€He€further€opined€that€the€attorneys€should€haveŠ <#Œ" Šdesignated€one€person€to€serve€as€lead€counsel€to€lend€direction€to€the€preparation€and€trial€of€theŠ "$r# Šcase.€€According€to€Keefe,€the€appellant€was€prejudiced€by€counselššs€lack€of€involvement€early€inŠ %X $ Šthe€case€when€the€appellant€gave€interviews€to€the€media€without€first€being€consulted€by€counsel.€Š ī%>!% ŠThe€jury€never€heard€these€statements€provided€to€the€press,€however,€Keefe€believed€the€appellantŠ Ō&$"& Šwas€prejudiced€just€the€same€because€the€lawyers€may€have€made€the€decision€to€plead€guilty€in€partŠ ŗ' #' Šdue€to€the€fact€that€these€statements€were€potentially€available€for€introduction€at€trial.€€Keefe€alsoŠ  (š#( Šbelieved€the€decision€to€plead€guilty€was€wrong€and€hastily€made.€€He€opined€that,€by€pleadingŠ †)Ö$) Šguilty,€the€defense€team€confused€the€jury€and€lost€an€array€of€appellate€issues.€€Keefe€furtherŠ l*¼%* Šcriticized€the€defense€team€as€developing€their€sentencing€theory€backwards.€€Specifically,€he€statedŠ R+¢&+ Šthat€the€defense€team€should€have€investigated€the€facts€and€the€appellantššs€background€before€theyŠ 8,ˆ', Šcame€up€with€a€psychological€theory€to€tell€the€jury€instead€of€trying€to€adopt€a€theory€and€then€fillŠ ° Šin€the€holes.€€He€also€emphasized€the€defense€teamššs€ineffectiveness€by€not€attempting€to€rebut€theŠ –ę ŠStateššs€theory€that€the€victim€remained€conscious€for€three€to€five€minutes€during€the€strangulation.Š |Ģ ŠĢą  ąJulie€Hackenmiller,€a€mitigation€specialist€with€Inquisitor,€Inc.,€was€retained€by€the€appellantŠ H˜ Šfor€the€post„conviction€proceeding.€€Hackenmiller€was€responsible€for€performing€the€social€historyŠ . ~ Šand€assessments€on€the€appellantššs€case.€€Inquisitor,€Inc.€began€collecting€the€appellantššs€records€andŠ  d Šlocating€witnesses€in€June€1998;€by€August€1998,€Hackenmiller€was€given€primary€responsibilityŠ ś J Šfor€the€mitigation€investigation.€€At€the€time€of€the€post„conviction€hearing,€Hackenmiller€stated€thatŠ ą 0 Šher€investigation€was€not€complete€and€she€needed€additional€time€to€complete€her€social€history€andŠ Ę   Šassessment€of€the€appellant.€€Although€she€received€the€appellantššs€high€school€records,€she€had€notŠ ¬ ü  Šyet€received€prison€records€from€Georgia€or€Florida,€despite€making€several€requests.€€She€stated€thatŠ ’ā  Šshe€requested€that€post„conviction€counsel€subpoena€these€records€in€August€1998.€€She€furtherŠ xČ  Štestified€that€she€needed€more€time€to€interview€one€of€the€appellantššs€school€principals€regardingŠ ^®  Šteasing€by€other€students€endured€by€the€appellant.€€Š D”  ŠĢą  ąHackenmiller€also€identified€other€mitigation€themes€that€were€not€explored€during€trial.€Š ` ŠSpecifically,€she€related€that€the€appellantššs€mother€had€an€extremely€abusive€childhood€andŠ öF Šbackground.€€Both€her€father€and€her€husband€were€extremely€abusive.€€His€mother,€as€well€as€otherŠ Ü, Šmaternal€family€members,€had€been€diagnosed€as€mentally€ill.€€Specifically,€the€appellantššs€motherŠ Ā Šhad€previously€suffered€a€š šnervous€breakdown,šš€and€š šshe€has€been€diagnosed€as€bipolar€and€post„Š Øų Štraumatic€stress€disorder.šš€€In€furtherance€of€this€avenue,€Hackenmiller€obtained€a€release€from€theŠ ŽŽ Šappellantššs€mother€for€her€medical€records.€€Notwithstanding,€she€had€not€yet€received€the€recordsŠ tÄ Šas€of€the€hearing€date.€€Additionally,€she€discovered€that€the€appellant€had€a€great€deal€of€trouble€asŠ ZŖ Ša€juvenile.€€He€had€a€substance€abuse€problem€and€had€an€š šextremely€little€social€support€system€toŠ @ Šturn€to.šš€€In€her€attempt€to€contact€members€of€the€appellantššs€family,€Hackenmiller€was€frustratedŠ &v Šby€the€appellantššs€motherššs€endeavor€to€thwart€the€interviews.€€In€essence,€Hackenmiller€stated€thatŠ  \ Šthe€familyššs€attitude€was€š šuncooperative.šš€€She€attributed€this€to€the€š šextreme€abuse€[experiencedŠ ņB Šby€the€appellant€and€his€family]€by€the€members€of€the€press.šš€€Despite€the€familyššs€current€position,Š Ų( ŠHackenmiller€believes€that€she€will€be€able€to€establish€rapport€with€the€mother€so€that€she€willŠ ¾ Ševentually€be€able€to€interview€the€brothers.Š ¤ō ŠĢą  ąHackenmiller€reported€that€the€appellantššs€maternal€grandfather,€an€alcoholic,€was€š šanŠ p!Ą  Šextremely€violent,€physically€and€sexually€abusive€individual.šš€€The€appellantššs€mother€was€addictedŠ V"¦! Što€Valium,€thus,€the€appellant€had€access€to€Valium€and€š šsometimes€overdosed€or€would€take€theŠ <#Œ" ŠValium.šš€€Hackenmiller€was€less€successful,€however,€in€investigating€the€paternal€side€of€theŠ "$r# Šappellantššs€family.€€Specifically,€she€testified€that€she€was€still€trying€to€identify€five€or€six€childrenŠ %X $ Šfrom€his€fatherššs€legal€marriage€to€another€woman.€€In€noting€the€relationship€of€the€appellantššsŠ ī%>!% Šparents,€Hackenmiller€testified€that€the€appellantššs€mother€and€father,€although€never€married,€spentŠ Ō&$"& Šseventeen€years€together.€€Š ŗ' #' ŠĢą  ąHackenmiller€was€in€possession€of€records€from€various€institutions€where€the€appellant€hadŠ †)Ö$) Šbeen€confined€as€a€juvenile€which€indicated€that€the€appellant€responded€well€to€positiveŠ l*¼%* Šreinforcement€in€an€institutional€setting.€€She€referred€to€a€report€from€a€family€therapy€session€whenŠ R+¢&+ Šthe€appellant€was€twelve€years€old€indicating€that€many€of€his€problems€derive€from€his€home€andŠ 8,ˆ', Šparental€situation.€€Another€psychiatric€report,€also€from€1979,€indicated€that€the€appellant€wasŠ ° Šextremely€motivated€and€performed€very€well€in€the€therapeutic€session.€€However,€the€reportŠ –ę Šindicated€that€the€appellantššs€home€life€was€lacking€in€support€and€psychological€warmth.€€AnotherŠ |Ģ Šreport€supported€these€conclusions,€including€that€the€appellant€responded€in€a€positive€manner€toŠ b² Špraise€and€encouragement.€€These€reports€focused€on€the€fact€that€the€appellant€required€continuityŠ H˜ Šbetween€his€teachers,€parents€and€school€authorities€regarding€his€discipline.€€Hackenmiller€reportedŠ . ~ Šthat€despite€this€advice,€continuity€in€the€home€was€not€maintained.€€A€discharge€summary€from€theŠ  d ŠParthenon€Pavilion€in€1981€indicated€that€the€appellant€had€š šmoved€home,€switched€school,€and€alsoŠ ś J Šhad€difficulty€at€home€with€his€father€being€accused€of€a€sexual€relationship€with€his€maternal€aunt.šš€Š ą 0 ŠThis€document€also€related€that€the€appellant€was€responding€well€to€treatment€in€a€therapeuticŠ Ę   Šenvironment.€€A€1981€report€from€the€Wilder€Youth€Development€Center€reiterated€that€the€appellantŠ ¬ ü  Šwas€doing€extremely€well€in€therapeutic€environment€and€he€was€making€excellent€grades€in€school.€Š ’ā  ŠA€Madison€Hospital€admission€in€1982€indicated€that€the€appellantššs€behavioral€problems€includedŠ xČ  Šproblems€at€school,€home€and€with€legal€authorities.€€This€document€diagnosed€the€appellant€withŠ ^®  Šš šadjustment€disorder€and€passive„dependent€personality.šš€€The€document€also€indicated€that€theŠ D”  Šappellantššs€drug€and€alcohol€usage€was€greatly€influenced€by€his€brothers€and€his€peers.€AnotherŠ *z  Šreport€indicated€that€the€appellant€associated€with€youths€that€got€into€trouble€and€that€the€appellantŠ ` Šappeared€to€be€a€follower.€€A€social€history€update€from€the€Spencer€Youth€Center€related€that,Š öF Šwithin€five€months€after€the€appellantššs€release€from€Wilder€Youth€Development€Center,€he€hadŠ Ü, Šreturned€to€using€alcohol€and€drugs.€€€A€classification€summary€performed€by€the€DeDe€WallaceŠ Ā ŠCenter€in€1982€provided€that€the€appellant€sought€help€in€that€he€wished€to€end€his€š šcrime„drugŠ Øų Šcycle.šš€€None€of€this€information€was€introduced€at€the€penalty€phase€of€the€trial.€€The€appellantššsŠ ŽŽ Šjuvenile€TDOC€records€listed€indicators€that€the€appellant€was€the€victim€of€sexual€abuse€by€otherŠ tÄ Šinmates€and€that€the€appellant€attempted€suicide€and€was€placed€on€suicide€watch.€€€€On€cross„Š ZŖ Šexamination,€Hackenmiller€admitted€that€Dr.€Nurcombe€had€access€to€all€but€the€š šWilderšš€records,Š @ Šhowever,€she€rationalized€that€Dr.€Nurcombe€only€covered€the€areas€of€mitigation€importŠ &v Šš šminimally.ššŠ  \ ŠĢą  ąThe€State€presented€the€testimony€of€Dr.€Bruce€Phillip€Levy,€Medical€Examiner€for€DavidsonŠ Ų( ŠCounty€and€Chief€Medical€Examiner€for€the€State€of€Tennessee.€€Specifically,€Dr.€Levy€was€calledŠ ¾ Što€testify€as€to€the€time€of€death€and€the€loss€of€consciousness€in€ligature€strangulation€cases.€€Dr.Š ¤ō ŠLevy€testified€that€there€are€three€different€mechanisms€that€can€cause€loss€of€consciousness€duringŠ Š Ś Šligature€strangulation:€(1)€compression€of€the€airway€itself;€(2)€compression€of€both€the€arteries€andŠ p!Ą  Šveins€in€the€neck;€and€(3)€occlusion€of€the€veins€in€the€neck.€€The€former€involves€the€most€pressureŠ V"¦! Šand€the€latter€involves€the€least€pressure€applied€around€the€neck.€€Dr.€Levy€testified€thatŠ <#Œ" Šconsciousness€would€be€lost,€in€the€second€instance,€in€about€ten€to€twenty€seconds€and€death€wouldŠ "$r# Šresult€in€about€four€to€five€minutes.€€He€stated,€in€this€type€of€case,€there€would€be€no€congestion€ofŠ %X $ Šthe€face,€no€hemorrhaging€in€the€eyes,€and€congestion€in€the€chest€below€the€ligature.€€In€the€thirdŠ ī%>!% Šinstance,€unconsciousness€would€result€in€about€60€seconds,€and€death€in€about€four€to€five€minutes.€Š Ō&$"& ŠDr.€Levy€stated€that,€in€this€instance,€there€would€be€marked€congestion€of€the€face€andŠ ŗ' #' Šhemorrhaging€of€the€eyes.€€According€to€Dr.€Levy,€there€has€been€dispute€in€the€medical€communityŠ  (š#( Šfor€the€previous€ten€years€regarding€the€length€of€time€someone€would€remain€conscious€duringŠ †)Ö$) Šstrangulation.€€He€testified€that€in€1989€or€1990,€the€belief€was€that€someone€could€remain€consciousŠ l*¼%* Šfor€as€long€as€they€could€hold€their€breath,€which€could€be€up€to€a€couple€of€minutes.Š R+¢&+ ŠŠ 8,ˆ', Šą  ą€€Dr.€Levy€stated€that,€regarding€the€present€case,€€he€reviewed€the€medical€examinerššs€file,Š ° Šthe€testimony€at€the€trial,€and€the€deposition€of€Dr.€Sperry€providing€an€opinion€as€to€the€length€ofŠ –ę Štime€that€the€victim€would€have€remained€conscious.€€€€After€reviewing€this€evidence,€Dr.€LevyŠ |Ģ Šconcluded€that€the€victim€died€as€a€result€of€a€ligature€strangulation€involving€compression€of€bothŠ b² Šthe€veins€and€arteries€as€well€as€occlusion€of€the€veins€alone.€€Dr.€Levy€also€opined€that€there€couldŠ H˜ Šhave€been€more€than€just€one€continual€attempt€to€strangle€the€victim€in€this€case.€€Given€the€trialŠ . ~ Štestimony€and€other€information,€Dr.€Levy€believed€it€was€possible€that€the€victim€could€haveŠ  d Šremained€conscious€for€longer€than€a€minute€or€two.€€Dr.€Levy€further€believed€that€the€minimumŠ ś J Šlength€of€time€the€victim€remained€conscious€was€forty€to€eighty€seconds,€assuming€there€was€aŠ ą 0 Šconstant€occlusion€of€the€veins.€€On€cross„examination,€given€his€review€of€the€evidence€in€the€case,Š Ę   ŠDr.€Levy€testified€that€he€disagreed€with€Dr.€Harlanššs€trial€testimony€that€the€victim€remainedŠ ¬ ü  Šconscious€for€three€to€five€minutes.Š ’ā  ŠĢĢą@ģąņ ņI.€€Ineffective€Assistance€of€CounselˆŠ D”  Šą  ąą ` ąĢą  ąó óThe€appellant€contends€that€he€was€denied€effective€assistance€of€counsel€due€to€(1)€counselššsŠ ` Šfailure€to€investigate,€identify€and€challenge€the€Stateššs€proof€that€the€victim€was€conscious€for€threeŠ öF Što€five€minutes€during€the€ligature€strangulation;€(2)€counselššs€failure€to€challenge€the€fingerprintŠ Ü, Ševidence;€€(3)€counselššs€hasty€decision€to€enter€a€guilty€plea;€(4)€the€systemic€deficiencies€in€theŠ Ā Šindigent€defense€system€of€the€State€of€Tennessee;€and€(5)€counselššs€failure€to€conduct€a€competentŠ Øų Šmitigation€investigation.€ņ ņó ó€Each€of€these€contentions€must€be€analyzed€using€the€two„prong€testŠ ŽŽ Šestablished€by€the€United€States€Supreme€Court€in€ņņStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466€U.S.€668,€687,€104Š tÄ ŠS.Ct.€2052,€2064€(1984),€for€deciding€Sixth€Amendment€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€claims:€Š ZŖ ŠĢą8  ąFirst,€the€defendant€must€show€that€counselššs€performance€was€deficient.€€ThisŠ &v Šrequires€showing€that€counsel€made€errors€so€serious€that€counsel€was€notŠ  \ Šfunctioning€as€the€ššcounselšš€guaranteed€the€defendant€by€the€Sixth€Amendment.€Š ņB ŠSecond,€the€defendant€must€show€that€the€deficient€performance€prejudiced€theŠ Ų( Šdefense.€€This€requires€showing€that€counselššs€errors€were€so€serious€as€to€depriveŠ ¾ Šthe€defendant€of€a€fair€trial,€a€trial€whose€result€is€reliable.€€Unless€a€defendant€makesŠ ¤ō Šboth€showings,€it€cannot€be€said€that€the€conviction€or€death€sentence€resulted€fromŠ Š Ś Ša€breakdown€in€the€adversary€process€that€renders€the€result€unreliable.Šp!Ą Š Š  ŠĢņņStricklandóó,€466€U.S.€at€687,€104€S.Ct.€at€2064.€€ņņSeeņņ€óóalsoóó€€ņņGoad€v.€Stateóó,€938€S.W.2d€363,€369€(Tenn.Š <#Œ" Š1996).€€Š "$r# ŠĢą  ąTo€demonstrate€that€counselššs€assistance€was€ineffective,€š šthe€defendant€must€overcome€theŠ ī%>!% Špresumption€that€under€the€circumstances€the€challenged€action€ššmight€be€considered€sound€trialŠ Ō&$"& Šstrategyšš€(citation€omitted),šš€and€show€instead,€that€counselššs€conduct€did€not€comport€with€theŠ ŗ' #' Šš šprevailing€norms€of€practicešš€and€thereby€š šfell€below€an€objective€standard€of€reasonableness.šš€Š  (š#( ŠņņStricklandóó,€466€U.S.€at€689„90,€104€S.Ct.€at€2064„66;€ņņGoadóó,€938€S.W.2d€at€369.Š †)Ö$) ŠĢą8  ą[I]n€assessing€the€prejudice€from€counselššs€errors€.€.€.€[w]hen€a€defendant€challengesŠ R+¢&+ Ša€conviction,€the€question€is€whether€there€is€a€reasonable€probability€that,€absent€theŠ 8,ˆ', Šerrors,€the€fact€finder€would€have€had€a€reasonable€doubt€respecting€guilt.€€When€aŠ ° Šdefendant€challenges€a€death€sentence€.€.€.€the€question€is€whether€there€is€aŠ –ę Šreasonable€probability€that,€absent€the€errors,€the€sentencer€š!š€including€an€appellateŠ |Ģ Šcourt,€to€the€extent€it€independently€reweighs€the€evidence€„€„€would€have€concludedŠ b² Šthat€the€balance€of€aggravating€and€mitigating€circumstances€did€not€warrant€death.ŠH˜Š Š  ŠĢÓÓņņStricklandóó,€466€U.S.€at€695,€104€S.Ct.€at€2068„69;€ņņGoadóó,€938€S.W.2d€at€370.Š  d ŠÓÓą  ąņņóó€Additionally,€this€court€should€avoid€the€"distorting€effects€of€hindsight"€and€"judge€theŠ ą 0 Šreasonableness€of€counsel's€challenged€conduct€on€the€facts€of€the€particular€case,€viewed€as€of€theŠ Ę   Štime€of€counsel's€conduct."€€ņņStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466€U.S.€at€689-690,€104€S.Ct.€at€2065-2066.€Š ¬ ü  ŠMoreover,€we€recognize€that€"our€duty€to€search€for€constitutional€[deficiencies]€with€painstakingŠ ’ā  Šcare€is€never€more€exacting€than€it€is€in€a€capital€case."€€ņņBurger€v.€Kempóó,€483€U.S.€776,€785,€107Š xČ  ŠS.Ct.€3114,€3121€(1987).Š ^®  ŠĢą  ąBefore€undertaking€review€of€the€appellantššs€specific€allegations,€we€note€that,€in€support€ofŠ *z  Šhis€claims€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel,€the€appellant€relies€heavily€upon€counselššs€admittedŠ ` Šdeficiencies€in€both€their€preparation€and€investigation€prior€to€trial€and€their€actual€performanceŠ öF Šduring€the€sentencing€phase.€€Such€concessions€by€counsel€are€not€binding€in€our€analysis.€€ņņSeeóó€€ņņStateŠ Ü, Šv.€Holzemeróó,€541€N.W.2d€837€at€fn€6€(Wis.€1995).€€In€determining€whether€a€defendant€was€deprivedŠ Ā Šof€constitutionally€guaranteed€effective€counsel,€this€court€determines€whether€the€acts€or€omissionsŠ Øų Šof€counsel€alleged€by€the€defendant€are€unreasonable€and€ask€whether€some€reasonable€lawyer€couldŠ ŽŽ Šhave€conducted€the€trial€in€that€manner.€€ņņSeeóó€€ņņChandler€v.€United€Statesóó,€218€F.3d€1305,€1316€(11ņņthóóŠ tÄ ŠCir.€2000).€€Because€the€standard€is€an€objective€one,€counselššs€admissions€at€the€post„convictionŠ ZŖ Šlevel€are€not€determinative€to€this€courtššs€review.€€ņņSee€generallyóó€€ņņChandleróó,€218€F.3d€at€1316;€ņņTarverŠ @ Šv.€Hopperóó,€169€F.3d€710,€716€(11ņņthóó€Cir.€1999);€ņņAtkins€v.€Singletaryóó,€965€F.2d€952,€960€(11ņņthóó€Cir.Š &v Š1992).Š  \ Š€Ģą@((ģąņ ņA.€€Failure€to€Challenge€Proof€of€Consciousness€after€Ligature€Strangulationó óˆŠ Ų( ŠĢą  ąPrior€to€trial,€the€State€filed€a€response€to€the€appellantššs€Motion€for€Bill€of€ParticularsŠ ¤ō Šregarding€the€factual€basis€for€establishing€the€š šheinous,€atrocious,€cruelšš€aggravating€circumstance.€Š Š Ś ŠThe€response€indicated€that€š šthe€victim€plead€[sic]€.€.€.€for€his€life€and€the€defendant€strangled€him.€Š p!Ą  ŠThe€victim€would€have€been€alive€and€conscious€for€3€to€5€minutes€prior€to€loss€of€consciousnessŠ V"¦! Šas€a€result€of€the€strangulation.šš€€Defense€counsel€was€on€notice€that€the€State€intended€to€call€Dr.Š <#Œ" ŠHarlan€to€prove€the€time€frame€for€death€by€ligature€strangulation€and€the€length€of€time€ofŠ "$r# Šconsciousness€prior€to€death.€€At€trial,€Dr.€Harlan€testified€that€the€victim€would€have€died€withinŠ %X $ Šthree€to€five€minutes€from€the€ligature€strangulation€and€would€have€remained€conscious€during€mostŠ ī%>!% Šof€this€period.€€Defense€counsel€did€not€challenge€the€time€frame€of€consciousness€on€cross„Š Ō&$"& Šexamination.Š ŗ' #' ŠĢą  ąThe€appellant€challenges€trial€counselššs€performance€in€attempting,€or€failing€to€attempt,€toŠ †)Ö$) Šrebut€the€Stateššs€evidence€regarding€the€length€of€time€the€victim€remained€conscious€during€theŠ l*¼%* Šstrangulation€in€this€case.€€The€appellant€also€claims€that€counsel€was€ineffective€by€failing€to€seekŠ R+¢&+ Šexpert€assistance€to€counter€Dr.€Harlanššs€trial€testimony,€by€failing€to€adequately€research€relevantŠ 8,ˆ', Šmedical€material€on€ligature€strangulation,€and€by€failing€to€timely€discuss€with€Dr.€Harlan€hisŠ ° Šconclusions€before€trial.€€The€appellant€argues€that€the€prejudice€from€counselššs€performance€resultedŠ –ę Šin€the€jury€being€misinformed€about€the€actual€length€of€time€the€victim€could€have€remainedŠ |Ģ Šconscious.€€Accordingly,€the€appellant€states€that€this€misinformation€caused€the€jury€to€find€theŠ b² Šexistence€of€the€š šheinous,€atrocious,€cruelšš€aggravating€circumstance.€€Further,€the€appellantŠ H˜ Šsuggests€that€this€was€š šthe€most€weighed€aggravating€factoršš€of€the€three€found€by€the€jury€in€thisŠ . ~ Šcase.Š  d ŠĢą  ąAt€the€evidentiary€hearing,€Michael€Terry€testified€that€he€was€responsible€for€cross„Š ą 0 Šexamining€Dr.€Harlan€at€trial.€€He€admitted€that€he€did€not€question€Dr.€Harlan€until€immediatelyŠ Ę   Šprior€to€trial,€but€explained€that€the€defense€team€š šdidnššt€think€that€there€was€any€issue€about€theŠ ¬ ü  Šcause€of€death.šš€He€admitted€that€he€was€unprepared.€Notwithstanding,€Terry€was€able€to€get€€Dr.Š ’ā  ŠHarlan€to€admit€on€cross„examination€that€the€victim€could€have€been€conscious€less€than€threeŠ xČ  Šminutes.€€Despite€their€lack€of€initial€investigation,€the€defense€team€did€present,€at€the€motion€forŠ ^®  Šnew€trial,€evidence€attacking€the€veracity€of€Dr.€Harlanššs€testimony.€Š D”  ŠĢą  ąBrock€Mahler€testified€that,€prior€to€trial,€he€had€strongly€urged€Michael€Terry€to€be€preparedŠ ` Što€cross„examine€Dr.€Harlan.€€He€stated€that€a€forensic€pathologist€was€definitely€needed€forŠ öF Šconsultation€regarding€Dr.€Harlanššs€opinion€relating€the€length€of€time€the€victim€remainedŠ Ü, Šconscious.€€Information€disputing€Dr.€Harlanššs€opinion€existed€and€was€presented€at€the€motion€forŠ Ā Šnew€trial.€€Mahler€further€disagreed€with€the€appellate€courtššs€characterization€of€the€š šheinous,Š Øų Šatrocious,€cruelšš€aggravator€which€focused€on€the€helplessness€of€the€victim.€€David€Keefe€wasŠ ŽŽ Šcalled€as€an€expert€witness€regarding€trial€counselššs€performance.€€He€emphasized€the€defense€teamššsŠ tÄ Šineffectiveness€by€not€attempting€to€rebut€the€Stateššs€theory€that€the€victim€remained€conscious€forŠ ZŖ Šthree€to€five€minutes€during€the€strangulation.Š @ ŠĢą  ąAn€affidavit€of€Dr.€Kris€Sperry€was€submitted€to€the€court.€€The€affidavit€provided€theŠ  \ Šfollowing:Š ņB ŠĢą8  ą5.€€Based€upon€my€review€of€these€materials,€it€is€my€opinion€that€Ronald€AllenŠ ¾ ŠBassett€died€as€the€consequence€of€a€ligature€strangulation,€when€the€rope€as€depictedŠ ¤ō Šin€the€photographs€was€wrapped€extremely€tightly€around€his€neck.€€Both€theŠ Š Ś Šphotographs€and€the€information€in€the€autopsy€indicate€that€this€ligature€wasŠ p!Ą  Šwrapped€very€tightly,€to€a€degree€that€would€quite€readily€restrict€both€the€arterialŠ V"¦! Šblood€flow€to€the€brain€and€the€venous€return€from€the€brain.Š<#Œ"Š Š  ŠĢą8  ą6.€€During€the€course€of€a€ligature€strangulation,€when€the€venous€blood€return€fromŠ %X $ Šthe€heart€alone€is€impeded,€an€individual€will€lose€consciousness€in€20€to€30€seconds.€Š ī%>!% ŠWhen€the€pressure€exerted€on€the€neck€is€sufficient€to€also€block€the€arterial€flow€toŠ Ō&$"& Šthe€brain,€consciousness€will€be€lost€in€10€to€15€seconds.€€With€either€or€both€of€theseŠ ŗ' #' Šmechanisms,€it€is€not€possible€for€an€individual€to€maintain€consciousness€for€aŠ  (š#( Šperiod€at€or€about€three€minutes.ą Ą ąą  ąą p ąŠ†)Ö$)Š Š  ŠĢą8  ą7.€€During€the€course€of€his€testimony,€€.€.€.€Dr.€Harlan€states€that€š šHe€would€haveŠ R+¢&+ Šremained€conscious€for€the€greater€part€of€three€to€five€minutes.šš€€In€my€opinion,€toŠ 8,ˆ', Ša€reasonable€degree€of€medical€certainty€.€.€.€it€was€not€possible€for€Mr.€Bassett€toŠ ° Šhave€maintained€consciousness€for€this€extended€period€of€time€while€being€strangledŠ –ę Šin€the€manner€depicted€and€described.€€Rather,€the€greatest€probability€is€that€he€lostŠ |Ģ Šconsciousness€within€no€more€than€20€to€30€seconds€after€the€ligature€was€applied,Š b² Šand€probably€sooner.€.€.€.€€Dr.€Harlanššs€testimony€grossly€exaggerates€the€time€thatŠ H˜ ŠMr.€Bassett€would€have€been€able€to€maintain€consciousness,€far€beyond€what€wouldŠ . ~ Šbe€considered€medically€possible€.€.€.€Š dŠ Š  ŠĢThe€appellant€also€presented€the€testimony€of€Dr.€Harlan€contained€in€the€capital€case,€ņņState€v.Š ą 0 ŠRonnie€Cauthernóó,€wherein€Dr.€Harlan€stated€that€unconsciousness€occurs€in€thirty€seconds€duringŠ Ę   Šligature€strangulation.Š ¬ ü  ŠĢą  ąIn€rebuttal,€the€State€presented€the€testimony€of€Dr.€Bruce€Phillip€Levy.€€Dr.€Levy€opinedŠ xČ  Šthat,€in€the€instant€case,€it€was€possible€that€the€victim€could€have€remained€conscious€for€longer€thanŠ ^®  Ša€minute€or€two.€€Dr.€Levy€admitted€on€cross„examination€that€he€disagreed€with€Dr.€HarlanššsŠ D”  Štestimony.€€Indeed,€Dr.€Levy€believed€that€the€minimum€length€of€time€the€victim€could€haveŠ *z  Šremained€conscious€was€forty€to€eighty€seconds.Š ` ŠĢą  ąThe€post„conviction€court€noted,€as€evidenced€by€the€testimony€at€the€hearing,€that,€at€theŠ Ü, Štime€of€the€appellantššs€trial,€the€popular€belief€was€that€consciousness€was€related€to€how€long€aŠ Ā Šperson€could€hold€his€breath€rather€than€the€blood€supply€to€the€brain.€€This€opinion€has€sinceŠ Øų Šchanged€to€the€common€position€that€once€the€blood€supply€to€the€brain€is€cut€by€strangulation€thenŠ ŽŽ Šunconsciousness€results.€€€Accordingly,€the€post„conviction€court€refused€to€find€the€failure€to€furtherŠ tÄ Šchallenge€Dr.€Harlanššs€testimony€ineffective.€€Additionally,€the€court€noted€that,€since€the€findingŠ ZŖ Šof€the€š šheinous,€atrocious,€cruelšš€circumstance€was€based€on€a€number€of€factors,€not€just€the€lengthŠ @ Šof€the€victimššs€consciousness,€even€if€counselššs€performance€was€deficient,€it€was€not€prejudicial.€Š &v ŠAlthough€we€find€deficient€counselššs€performance€in€failing€to€fully€investigate€and€challenge€theŠ  \ ŠStateššs€proof€that€the€victim€was€conscious€for€three€to€five€minutes€during€the€ligature€strangulation,Š ņB Šwe€agree€with€the€post„conviction€court€that€no€prejudice€enured€to€the€appellantššs€detriment.Š Ų( ŠĢą  ąThe€jury€imposed€a€sentence€of€death,€finding€the€presence€of€three€statutory€aggravatingŠ ¤ō Šcircumstances,€ņņi.e.óó,€(1)€the€defendant€was€previously€convicted€of€one€or€more€felonies€whoseŠ Š Ś Šstatutory€elements€involve€the€use€of€violence€to€the€person;€(2)€the€murder€was€especially€š šheinous,Š p!Ą  Šatrocious€or€cruelšš€in€that€it€involved€torture€or€serious€physical€abuse€beyond€that€necessary€toŠ V"¦! Šproduce€death;€and€(3)€the€murder€was€committed€while€the€defendant€was€engaged€in€committingŠ <#Œ" Ša€robbery.€€ņņSeeóó€€ņņHodgesóó,€944€S.W.2d€at€351€(citing€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€šš€39„13„204(i)(2);€(i)(5);€andŠ "$r# Š(i)(7)€(1991)).€€On€direct€appeal,€our€supreme€court€found€the€proof€sufficient€to€establish€theŠ %X $ Špresence€of€these€aggravating€circumstances.€€ņņSeeóó€€ņņHodgesóó,€944€S.W.2d€at€357„358.€€Specifically,Š ī%>!% Šin€finding€the€evidence€sufficient€to€support€application€of€the€š šheinous,€atrocious,€cruelššŠ Ō&$"& Šaggravating€circumstance,€our€supreme€court€found,€š š[t]he€proof€introduced€by€the€State€during€theŠ ŗ' #' Štrial€clearly€established€torture.šš€€ņņHodgesóó,€944€S.W.2d€at€357€(ņņfootnote€omittedóó).Š  (š#( ŠĢą8  ąHodges€handcuffed€the€victim,€bound€his€feet€with€duct€tape€and€left€the€victim€lyingŠ l*¼%* Šon€the€bed€with€a€pillow€over€his€head.€€No€doubt,€the€victim€suffered€considerableŠ R+¢&+ Šmental€pain€as€the€appellant,€along€with€Trina€Brown,€ransacked€his€home,€lookingŠ 8,ˆ', Šfor€valuable€property€and€money.€€The€helpless€victimššs€mental€pain,€no€doubt,Š ° Šincreased€when€the€appellant€and€Brown,€took€a€break,€and€over€a€coke,€discussedŠ –ę Šwhether€or€not€they€should€kill€the€victim.€€The€evidence€surrounding€the€murderŠ |Ģ Šitself€shows€that€the€victim€pleaded€with€Hodges€for€his€life.€€ņņDr.€Harlan€testifiedŠ b² Šthat€the€killing€would€have€taken€between€three€to€five€minutes€to€accomplish€andŠ H˜ Šthat€[the]€victim€would€have€been€conscious€during€most€of€this€periodóó.€€BrownŠ . ~ Štestified€that€she€heard€the€victim€moaning€and€making€a€choking€sound.€€The€factsŠ  d Šand€circumstances€surrounding€this€murder,€including€the€strangulation,€are€clearlyŠ ś J Šsufficient€to€establish€torture.€.€.€.Šą 0Š Š  ŠĢņņHodgesóó,€944€S.W.2d€at€357„358€(emphasis€added).€€Indeed,€the€testimony€regarding€the€length€ofŠ ¬ ü  Štime€of€the€victimššs€consciousness€was€only€one€factor€in€establishing€š štorture.šš€€ņņSeeóó€€ņņState€v.€HenryŠ ’ā  ŠEugene€Hodgesóó,€No.€€01C01„9212„CR„00382€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€at€Jackson,€May€18,€1995),€ņņaffššdŠ xČ  Šbyóó,€944€S.W.2d€346€(Tenn.€1997)€(š š[s]trangulation€alone€does€not€establish€the€heinous,€atrociousŠ ^®  Šand€cruel€aggravating€factor.šš).€€Thus,€even€had€defense€counsel€established€that€the€length€of€theŠ D”  Švictimššs€consciousness€was€only€twenty€to€thirty€seconds,€ample€evidence€still€remained€from€whichŠ *z  Šthe€jury€could€have€found€the€š šheinous,€atrocious,€cruelšš€aggravating€circumstance.€€Accordingly,Š ` Šthe€appellant€has€failed€to€establish€prejudice€resulting€from€counselššs€deficient€conduct.Š öF ŠĢĢą@K K ģąņ ņB.€€Failure€to€Challenge€Fingerprint€EvidenceˆŠ Øų ŠĢą  ąó óThe€appellant€contends€that€counsel€was€ineffective€by€failing€to€seek€an€independentŠ tÄ Šfingerprint€examiner€to€review€the€conclusions€drawn€by€the€Stateššs€examiners,€failing€to€evaluateŠ ZŖ Šthe€procedures€used€to€lift€and€preserve€the€latent€print,€and€failing€to€identify€or€eliminate€unknownŠ @ Šlatent€prints€found€in€the€victimššs€residence.€€The€appellant€further€claims€that€he€was€precluded€fromŠ &v Šdemonstrating€prejudice€due€to€the€post„conviction€courtššs€denial€of€funds€for€a€fingerprint€expert.Š  \ ŠĢą  ąThis€claim€focuses€upon€a€latent€fingerprint€lifted€from€a€unicorn€glass€globe€found€in€theŠ Ų( Švictimššs€residence.€€A€latent€fingerprint€examiner€employed€by€the€Metro€Police€DepartmentŠ ¾ Šexamined€the€latent€print€and€compared€this€print€to€known€prints€of€the€appellant.€€The€prints€wereŠ ¤ō Šidentified€as€those€of€the€appellant.€€€Trial€counsel€did€not€have€an€independent€fingerprint€expertŠ Š Ś Šreview€the€conclusions€drawn€by€the€Stateššs€examiners€nor€did€they€challenge€the€procedures€usedŠ p!Ą  Što€lift€and€preserve€the€latent€print.Š V"¦! ŠĢą  ąThe€post„conviction€court€denied€post„conviction€counselššs€motion€for€funds€for€a€fingerprintŠ "$r# Šexpert.€€Thus,€no€testimony€was€presented€to€explain€the€failure€to€request€a€fingerprint€expert.€€Š %X $ ŠNotwithstanding,€given€the€nature€of€the€case,€we€presume€a€threshold€finding€of€deficientŠ ī%>!% Šperformance€regarding€counselššs€failure€to€investigate€the€Stateššs€expertššs€findings.€€However,€theŠ Ō&$"& Šappellant€has€not€demonstrated€how€he€was€harmed€by€counsel's€failure€to€request€the€services€ofŠ ŗ' #' Šindependent€experts.€€ņņSeeóó€€ņņBlackóó,€794€S.W.2d€at€757.€€As€noted€by€the€post„conviction€court€in€itsŠ  (š#( Šdenial€of€funds,€the€qualifications€of€the€State's€experts€were€not€challenged€and€there€is€no€allegationŠ †)Ö$) Šof€bias.€€€ņņSeeóó€€ņņinfraóó.Š l*¼%* Šā āŠ R+¢&+ Šą  ąWhat€is€more€important,€however,€is€the€effect€of€the€appellantššs€guilty€plea.€€Once€a€guiltyŠ ° Šā āplea€has€been€entered,€effectiveness€of€counsel€is€relevant€only€to€the€extent€that€it€affects€theŠ –ę Švoluntariness€of€the€plea.€€In€other€words,€although€some€pre„plea€action€or€inaction€of€counsel€mayŠ |Ģ Šhave€been€deficient,€€in€order€to€satisfy€the€prejudice€requirement,€the€defendant€must€show€that€thereŠ b² Šis€a€reasonable€probability€that,€but€for€counsel's€errors,€he€would€not€have€pled€guilty€and€wouldŠ H˜ Šhave€insisted€on€going€to€trial.€€ņņHill€v.€Lockhartóó,€474€U.S.€52,€58,€106€S.Ct.€366,€370€(1985)ņņóó;€ņņsee€alsoóóŠ . ~ ŠņņóóŌ‡ō\Å ņXXQ]Ō€ņņŌ#†XQ]X ņō\Å×-#ŌWalton€v.€Stateóó,€966€S.W.2d€54,€55€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1997)ņņóó€€The€appellant€has€failed€to€show€howŠ  d Šsuch€an€attack€on€the€fingerprint€evidence€would€have€altered€his€decision€to€plead€guilty.€€The€proofŠ ś J Šdoes€show,€however,€the€overwhelming€evidence€of€the€appellantššs€guilt€irregardless€of€theŠ ą 0 Šfingerprint€evidence.€€Indeed,€the€appellant€publicly€confessed€to€the€murder;€personal€property€ofŠ Ę   Šthe€victim€was€found€in€the€appellantššs€possession€at€the€time€of€his€arrest;€and€the€appellantššsŠ ¬ ü  Šgirlfriend,€Trina€Brown,€had€been€video„taped€withdrawing€money€with€the€victimššs€automated€tellerŠ ’ā  Šcard.€€Given€the€quantity€of€the€inculpatory€evidence,€we€cannot€conclude,€even€had€counsel€beenŠ xČ  Šsuccessful€in€challenging€the€fingerprint€evidence,€that€the€appellant€would€not€have€made€theŠ ^®  Šdecision€to€plead€guilty.€€Moreover,€the€mere€fact€that€the€State€relies€upon€expert€evidence€does€notŠ D”  Šmean€that€an€indigent€accused€is€entitled€to€an€expert€unless€the€failure€to€provide€expert€servicesŠ *z  Šamounts€to€a€denial€of€due€process.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņState€v.€Phillipsóó,€728€S.W.2d€21,€25€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Š ` Š1986).€€Accordingly,€the€appellant€has€failed€to€meet€his€burden€of€establishing€that€counsel's€failureŠ öF Što€request€a€fingerprint€expert€prejudiced€the€outcome€of€his€trial.€€This€claim€is€without€merit.Š Ü, Šņ ņĢĢą@j j ģąC.€€Hasty€Decision€to€Enter€Guilty€PleaˆŠ ŽŽ ŠĢą  ąó óAfter€voir€dire€of€the€jury€for€the€guilt€phase€of€the€trial,€the€appellant€abandoned€his€plea€ofŠ ZŖ Šš šnot€guilty,šš€and€entered€a€plea€of€guilty€to€all€counts€charged€against€him,€š šmaking€himŠ @ Šimmediately€death€eligible.šš€€The€appellant€claims€that€trial€counsel€were€ineffective€by€deciding€toŠ &v Šplead€guilty€rather€than€proceed€to€trial.€€He€maintains€that€the€advice€constituted€deficient€legalŠ  \ Šrepresentation€that€resulted€in€severe€prejudice.€€Additionally,€he€contends€that€the€š šhastyšš€decisionŠ ņB Što€enter€the€plea€effectively€š šdestroyed€their€credibility€with€the€jury.šš€€He€argues€that€the€decisionŠ Ų( Šwas€made€absent€(1)€any€consideration€of€the€pros€and€cons€of€pleading€guilty;€(2)€any€research€intoŠ ¾ Šthe€ramifications€of€pleading€guilty€in€a€capital€case;€and€(3)€any€consultation€with€third€partyŠ ¤ō Šattorneys€on€the€matter.€€Š Š Ś ŠĢą  ąAt€the€post„conviction€hearing,€Dawson€testified€that€the€decision€to€enter€a€guilty€plea€wasŠ V"¦! Šmade€the€weekend€prior€to€trial€when€it€was€determined€that€š šthere€was€no€way€we€were€going€toŠ <#Œ" Šconvince€anybody€that€Mr.€Hodges€didnššt€kill€the€victim€in€this€matter.šš€€ņ ņó óHe€explained€that,€at€thatŠ "$r# Štime,€the€defense€team€believed€that€by€entering€a€plea€during€the€guilt€phase€of€the€trial,€they€wouldŠ %X $ Šgain€credibility€with€the€jury€for€the€sentencing€phase.€€The€defense€team€also€hoped€to€surprise€theŠ ī%>!% ŠState€by€entering€the€plea.€€In€essence,€the€defense€team€intended€to€disrupt€the€bifurcated€nature€ofŠ Ō&$"& Šthe€trial,€thereby€precluding€the€State€from€introducing€evidence€during€the€penalty€phase€which€theŠ ŗ' #' ŠState€had€planned€to€introduce€at€the€guilt€phase.€€Notwithstanding€this€reasoning,€Dawson€admittedŠ  (š#( Šthat,€although€the€proof€was€overwhelming,€in€hindsight,€they€should€have€proceeded€to€trial€so€thatŠ †)Ö$) Šthey€could€have€begun€introduction€of€their€mitigation€theories.ņ ņ€ó óMichael€Terry€corroboratedŠ l*¼%* ŠDawsonššs€testimony€regarding€the€appellantššs€guilty€plea.€€He€explained€that€the€plea€was€supposedŠ R+¢&+ Što€be€š ša€demonstration€of€remorse€for€the€jury.šš€€However,€he€agrees€that€the€decision€was€a€mistakeŠ 8,ˆ', Šand€that€they€should€have€at€a€least€š špitched€a€fight.šš€€The€appellant€did€not€testify€at€the€post„Š ° Šconviction€hearing.€€Other€than€his€attorneys€protestations€of€ineffectiveness€at€this€level,€there€is€noŠ –ę Šother€evidence€that€the€appellantššs€guilty€plea€was€not€knowingly€entered.€€The€post„conviction€courtŠ |Ģ Šconcluded€that€counsel€made€an€informed€tactical€decision€in€advising€the€appellant€to€enter€theŠ b² Šguilty€plea.€€€ņ ņŠ H˜ ŠĢą  ąó óWhile€law€and€tradition€allocate€to€counsel€the€right€to€make€binding€decisions€of€trialŠ  d Šstrategy€in€many€areas,€ņņseeóó€€ņņFaretta€v.€Californiaóó,€422€U.S.€806,€95€S.Ct.€2525€(1975),€the€accusedŠ ś J Šretains€the€ultimate€authority€to€make€certain€fundamental€decisions€regarding€the€case.€€The€decisionŠ ą 0 Što€plead€guilty€or€not€guilty€is€a€matter€reserved€solely€for€the€accused.€€ņņSeeóó€€ņņJones€v.€Barnesóó,€463Š Ę   ŠU.S.€745,€751,€103€S.Ct.€3308,€3312€(1983)€(š šthe€accused€has€the€ultimate€authority€to€make€certainŠ ¬ ü  Šfundamental€decisions€regarding€the€case,€as€to€whether€to€plead€guilty,€waive€a€jury,€testify€in€hisŠ ’ā  Šor€her€own€behalf,€or€take€an€appeal.€.€.€.šš).ņ ņ€€ó óIndeed,€the€gravity€of€the€consequences€of€a€decision€toŠ xČ  Šplead€guilty€or€to€admit€oneššs€guilt€demands€that€the€decision€remain€in€the€defendantššs€hand.ņņóó€€AŠ ^®  Šlawyer€may€make€a€tactical€determination€of€how€to€run€a€trial,€but€the€due€process€clause€does€notŠ D”  Špermit€the€attorney€to€enter€a€guilty€plea€without€the€clientššs€consent.€€ņņSeeóó€€ņņBrookhart€v.€Janisóó,€384Š *z  ŠU.S.€1,€8,€86€S.Ct.€1245,€1249€(1966)€(Harlan,€J.,€concurring).€€In€sum,€the€decision€to€plea€guiltyŠ ` Šbelongs€to€the€accused,€not€the€attorney.Š öF ŠĢą  ąA€plea€of€guilty€should€not€be€accepted€unless€it€appears€that€the€plea€is€freely€and€voluntarilyŠ Ā Šentered€by€the€accused.€€ņņSeeóó€€ņņBrady€v.€United€Statesóó,€397€U.S.€742,€90€S.Ct.€1463€(1970);€ņņBoykinŠ Øų Šv.€Alabamaóó,€395€U.S.€238,€89€S.Ct.€1709€(1969);€ņņBlankenship€v.€Stateóó,€858€S.W.2d€897,€904€(Tenn.Š ŽŽ Š1993).€€The€constitutional€validity€of€a€guilty€plea€made€upon€the€advice€of€counsel€depends€uponŠ tÄ Šwhether€counselššs€performance€was€reasonably€competent,€rendering€the€defendant€effectiveŠ ZŖ Šrepresentation€during€the€particular€proceedings.€€If€the€pleas€were€made€in€reasonable€reliance€uponŠ @ Šthe€advice€or€representation€of€counsel,€which€advice€or€representation€demonstrated€incompetence,Š &v Šthen€it€can€be€said€that€the€defendantššs€pleas€were€not€voluntary.׃ׯ ƒ #ĆŻņņŚ  Ś9Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀€Š  \ ŠĢą  ąThe€two„prong€ņņStricklandóó€standard€for€determining€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€isŠ Ų( Šapplicable€to€ineffective€assistance€claims€arising€out€of€guilty€plea€proceedings.€€ņņHill€v.€Lockhartóó,Š ¾ Š474€U.S.€52,€57,€106€S.Ct.€366,€369„70€(1985).€€To€satisfy€the€first€prong,€the€appellant€mustŠ ¤ō Šestablish€that€counselššs€advice€fell€below€an€objective€standard€of€reasonableness.€€ņņSee€generallyóó€Š Š Ś ŠņņBaxter€v.€Roseóó,€523€S.W.2d€930,€936€(Tenn.€1975);€ņņWalton€v.€Stateóó,€966€S.W.2d€54,€54„55€(Tenn.Š p!Ą  ŠCrim.€App.€1997).€€In€order€to€satisfy€the€š šprejudicešš€prong,€the€appellant€must€prove€that,€š šthereŠ V"¦! Šis€a€reasonable€probability€that,€but€for€counselššs€errors,€he€would€not€have€pleaded€guilty€and€wouldŠ <#Œ" Šhave€insisted€on€going€to€trial.šš€€ņņHill€v.€Lockhartóó,€474€U.S.€at€59,€106€S.Ct.€at€370;€ņņWaltonóó,€966Š "$r# ŠS.W.2d€at€55.Š %X $ ŠŠ ī%>!% Šą8  ąIn€many€guilty€plea€cases,€the€ššprejudicešš€inquiry€will€closely€resemble€the€inquiryŠ ° Šengaged€in€by€the€courts€reviewing€ineffective€assistance€challenges€to€convictionsŠ –ę Šobtained€through€a€trial.€€For€example,€where€the€alleged€error€of€counsel€is€a€failureŠ |Ģ Što€investigate€or€discover€potentially€exculpatory€evidence,€the€determinationŠ b² Šwhether€the€error€ššprejudicedšš€the€defendant€by€causing€him€to€plead€guilty€ratherŠ H˜ Šthan€go€to€trial€will€depend€on€the€likelihood€that€discovery€of€the€evidence€wouldŠ . ~ Šhave€led€counsel€to€change€his€recommendation€as€to€the€plea.€€This€assessment,€inŠ  d Šturn,€will€depend€in€large€part€on€a€prediction€whether€the€evidence€likely€would€haveŠ ś J Šchanged€the€outcome€of€a€trial.€€Similarly,€where€the€alleged€error€of€counsel€is€aŠ ą 0 Šfailure€to€advise€the€defendant€of€a€potential€affirmative€defense€to€the€crime€charged,Š Ę   Šthe€resolution€of€the€ššprejudicešš€inquiry€will€depend€largely€on€whether€theŠ ¬ ü  Šaffirmative€defense€likely€would€have€succeeded€at€trial.Š’ā Š Š  ŠĢņņHill€v.€Lockhartóó,€474€U.S.€at€59,€106€S.Ct.€at€370„371.€€In€considering€whether€defense€counsel€wasŠ ^®  Šincompetent€in€advising€the€appellant€to€plead€guilty,€we€must€š šeliminate€the€distorting€effects€ofŠ D”  Šhindsight,€.€.€.€and€.€.€.€evaluate€the€conduct€from€counselššs€perspective€at€the€time.šš€€ņņStrickland€v.Š *z  ŠWashingtonóó,€466€U.S.€at€689,€104€S.Ct.€at€2065.€€We€also€must€indulge€a€strong€presumption€thatŠ ` Šcounselššs€conduct€fell€within€the€wide€range€of€reasonable€professional€assistance.€€ņņStrickland€v.Š öF ŠWashingtonóó,€466€U.S.€at€689,€104€S.Ct.€at€2065.Š Ü, ŠĢą  ąAlthough€it€is€true€that€the€appellant€ultimately€gained€nothing€by€pleading€guilty,€the€recordŠ Øų Špersuasively€demonstrates€that€the€appellant€had€little€to€gain€by€insisting€upon€a€trial.€€It€isŠ ŽŽ Šundisputed€that€the€evidence€against€the€appellant€was€overwhelming€and€that€his€chances€ofŠ tÄ Šacquittal€were€virtually€non„existent.€€Indeed,€in€advising€the€appellant,€defense€counsel€was€facedŠ ZŖ Šwith€two€options:€plead€not€guilty€to€the€indictment€and€face€a€full€trial;€or€plead€guilty€to€theŠ @ Šindictment€and€face€limited€evidence€in€a€sentencing€hearing€with€an€opportunity€to€trade€on€hisŠ &v Šacceptance€of€his€guilt€and€remorse.€€Confronted€with€the€overwhelming€evidence€of€the€appellantššsŠ  \ Šguilt,€defense€counsel€advised€the€appellant€to€plead€guilty€in€the€reasonable€hope€of€obtainingŠ ņB Šleniency€during€the€sentencing€phase.€€Defense€counsel€reasonably€believed€that€the€jury€would€viewŠ Ų( Šthe€appellantššs€guilty€plea€as€an€expression€of€remorse€warranting€a€less€severe€sentence€than€thatŠ ¾ Šimposed€upon€a€defendant€who€protests€his€innocence€in€the€face€of€overwhelming€evidence€of€guilt.€Š ¤ō ŠMoreover,€by€pleading€guilty,€the€appellant€eliminated€the€presentation€to€the€jury€of€all€of€theŠ Š Ś Ševidence€available€to€establish€the€appellantššs€guilt€of€the€murder.€€The€hard€callous€facts€behind€theŠ p!Ą  Šoffenses,€in€essence,€were€desensitized€by€avoiding€the€guilt€phase.€€The€absence€of€an€in„depthŠ V"¦! Šrecitation€of€facts€enabled€the€appellant€to€seek€some€sympathy€from€the€jury€in€the€face€ofŠ <#Œ" Šmitigating€evidence.Š "$r# ŠĢą  ąViewing€from€counselššs€perspective€at€the€time€the€advice€was€rendered€to€the€appellantŠ ī%>!% Šregarding€the€decision€to€plead€guilty,€we€must€reject€the€claim€that€such€advice€was€outside€theŠ Ō&$"& Šrange€of€competence€demanded€of€attorneys€in€criminal€cases.€The€Supreme€Court€has€recognizedŠ ŗ' #' Šthat€the€expectation€or€hope€of€a€lesser€sentence€or€the€convincing€nature€of€the€evidence€against€theŠ  (š#( Šaccused€are€considerations€that€might€suggest€the€advisability€of€a€guilty€plea.€€ņņUnited€States€v.Š †)Ö$) ŠAgursóó,€427€U.S.€97,€96€S.Ct.€2392€(1976);€ņņsee€alsoóó€ņņBrady€v.€United€Statesóó,€397€U.S.€at€742,€90€S.Ct.Š l*¼%* Šat€1463.€€Counsel,€in€the€present€case,€made€a€tactical€decision€that€a€guilty€plea€was€in€theŠ R+¢&+ Šappellantššs€best€interest€and€advised€the€appellant€accordingly.€€The€defense€strategy€was€to€avoidŠ 8,ˆ', Šthe€death€sentence.€€Trial€tactics€which€arise€from€a€matter€of€defense€strategy€will€not€support€aŠ ° Šclaim€of€ineffective€assistance.€€An€informed€strategic€choice€of€counsel€is€virtually€unchallengeable.€Š –ę ŠņņSeeóó€€ņņHellard€v.€Stateóó,€629€S.W.2d€4,€9€(Tenn.€1982).€€Although€defense€counselššs€strategy€forŠ |Ģ Šavoiding€the€death€penalty€was€thwarted,€the€decision€to€pursue€that€particular€strategy€cannot€beŠ b² Šdeemed€incompetent.€€€€Given€the€overwhelming€evidence€of€guilt,€the€advice€of€counsel€regardingŠ H˜ Šthe€appellantššs€decision€to€plead€guiltyņ ņ€ó ócannot€be€faulted€in€hindsight.€€The€courts€must€exerciseŠ . ~ Šsubstantial€restraint€before€interfering€with€the€attorney„client€relationship€and€the€matter€of€strategyŠ  d Šand€tactics.€€ņņSeeóó€ņņHolland€v.€Stateóó,€761€S.W.2d€307,€320€(Tex.€Crim.€App.€1988),€ņņcert.€deniedóó,€489Š ś J ŠU.S.€1091,€109€S.Ct.€1560€(1989)€(citation€omitted).€€Such€an€inquiry€should€only€be€made€whereŠ ą 0 Šit€does€not€appear€that€there€exists€any€plausible€basis€in€strategy€and€tactics€for€the€particular€act€orŠ Ę   Šacts€by€counsel.€€ņņIdóó.€€€Errors€in€trial€strategy€do€not€generally€establish€incompetence.€€ņņStrickland€v.Š ¬ ü  ŠWashingtonóó,€466€U.S.€at€689,€104€S.Ct.€at€2065;€ņņsee€alsoóó€€ņņMcMann€v.€Richardsonóó,€397€U.S.€at€770,Š ’ā  Š90€S.Ct.€at€1448€(š šthat€a€guilty€plea€must€be€intelligently€made€is€not€a€requirement€that€all€adviceŠ xČ  Šoffered€by€defendantššs€lawyer€withstand€retrospective€examination€in€a€post„conviction€hearing.šš).€Š ^®  ŠMoreover,€we€acknowledge€that€a€defendant€is€entitled€to€competent,€not€perfect,€representation.€Š D”  ŠņņSeeóó€€ņņDenton€v.€Stateóó,€945€S.W.2d€793,€796€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€€Accordingly,€after€review€ofŠ *z  Šthe€record,€we€cannot€conclude€that€counselššs€recommendation€to€the€appellant€to€plead€guiltyŠ ` Šconstituted€incompetent€advice.€€This€issue€is€without€merit.ņ ņŠ öF Šą  ąó ó€ņ ņŠ Ü, ŠĢą@ģąD.€€Inherent€Ineffectiveness€based€upon€Tennesseeššs€Indigent€Defense€SystemˆŠ Øų Šą  ąą ` ąą ø ąą  ąą h ąą Ą ąĢą  ąó óThe€appellant€next€claims€that€the€systemic€deficiencies€in€the€indigent€defense€system€of€theŠ tÄ ŠState€of€Tennessee€render€any€indigent€capital€defendantššs€Sixth€Amendment€right€to€effectiveŠ ZŖ Šcounsel€a€nullity€because€it€forces€the€court„appointed€attorney€to€choose€between€the€defendantššsŠ @ Šright€to€effective€representation€and€the€attorneyššs€right€to€earn€a€living.€€€In€other€words,€he€assertsŠ &v Šthat€the€fee€structure€afforded€counsel€for€indigent€capital€defendants€in€this€state€necessarily€deniesŠ  \ Šhim€effective€representation€by€counsel€due€to€counselššs€lack€of€devotion€to€his€case.€€Particularly,Š ņB Šthe€appellant€supports€his€claim€by€referencing€counselššs€lack€of€involvement€in€his€case€upon€initialŠ Ų( Šappointment.€€Indeed,€he€asserts€that€had€counsel€maintained€more€contact€with€the€appellant€uponŠ ¾ Štheir€appointment,€they€could€have€prevented€him€from€making€inculpatory€statements€to€the€mediaŠ ¤ō Šand€they€could€have€further€investigated€his€case.€€He€explains€that€had€counsel€received€greaterŠ Š Ś Šcompensation,€they€would€have€been€willing€to€devote€more€time€to€his€case.Š p!Ą  ŠĢą  ąThe€appellantššs€claim€that€the€court„appointed€compensation€scheme€created€a€financialŠ <#Œ" Šdisincentive€to€provide€competent,€quality€representation€in€this€case€is€belied€by€the€record.€€ByŠ "$r# Štheir€own€account,€each€attorney€expended€more€than€300€hours€on€the€case.€€The€hiredŠ %X $ Šinvestigator/mitigation€expert€spent€at€least€150€hours€on€the€case.€€In€reviewing€the€appellantššsŠ ī%>!% Šclaim€that€earlier€intervention€by€counsel€would€have€prevented€him€from€giving€inculpatoryŠ Ō&$"& Šinterviews€with€the€media,€the€post„conviction€court€found€that€Š ŗ' #' ŠĢą8  ą[t]he€petitioner€is€a€person€who€craves€attention.€€Even€after€his€return€to€NashvilleŠ †)Ö$) Šand€conferring€with€counsel€he€continued€to€write€letters€and€give€interviews.€€ThereŠ l*¼%* Šis€no€proof€that€earlier€intervention€by€counsel€would€have€prevented€the€petitionerŠ R+¢&+ Šfrom€making€these€inculpatory€disclosures€to€the€press€or€government€officials.Š8,ˆ',Š Š  ЇThe€court€further€discounted€any€inherent€ineffectiveness€resulting€from€the€compensatory€scheduleŠ ° Šof€appointed€counsel€for€capital€indigent€defendants,€finding:Š –ę ŠĢą8  ą.€.€.€[g]iven€the€amount€of€time€spent€by€counsel€in€preparation€for€the€1992€trial,€thisŠ b² Šcould€not€be€the€case.ņ ņ€€ó óThere€is€no€proof€in€this€record€that€if€trial€counsel€had€beenŠ H˜ Špaid€more,€that€they€would€have€done€more.€€The€testimony€on€this€issue€wasŠ . ~ Šamorphous€and€vague.€€Sure,€counsel€would€have€liked€to€be€paid€more,€but€the€feeŠ  d Šstructure€did€not€deprive€this€petitioner€of€effective€representation.€€ņņSeeóó€€ņņJohnson€v.Š ś J ŠStateóó,€€693€N.E.2d€941,€952„953€(Ind.€1998)€(counsel€not€deficient€even€though€atŠ ą 0 Špost„conviction€hearing€he€said€that€if€paid€more€he€might€have€been€able€to€doŠ Ę   Šmore).€€ņņSee€alsoóó€€ņņBui€v.€Stateóó,€717€So.2d€6,€15„16€(Ala.€Crim.€App.€1997).Ь ü Š Š  ŠĢą  ąThe€record€does€not€preponderate€against€the€post„conviction€courtššs€findings.€€We€concludeŠ xČ  Šthat€the€appellant€has€failed€to€establish€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence€that€counsel€could€haveŠ ^®  Šprevented€him€from€giving€inculpatory€interviews€with€the€media.€€Nor€has€the€appellant€establishedŠ D”  Šthat€counsel€failed€to€devote€time€to€the€appellantššs€case€due€to€the€fee€schedule€for€counselŠ *z  Šappointed€to€indigent€defendants€in€capital€cases.€Š ` ŠĢą  ąIn€making€our€decision,€we€are€fully€cognizant€of€the€legal€professionššs€traditional€andŠ Ü, Šhistoric€role€in€society.€€The€practice€of€law€is€not€a€marketplace€business€or€commercial€venture€but,Š Ā Šrather,€a€profession€dedicated€primarily€to€service.€€ņņSeeóó€€ņņBailey€v.€Stateóó,€424€S.E.2d€503,€504€(S.C.Š Øų Š1992),€ņņrehššg€deniedóó,€(1993).€€Upon€admittance€to€practice€in€this€state,€attorneys€accept€theŠ ŽŽ Šaspirational€objective€that€part€of€oneššs€professional€obligation€is€that€š ševery€person€in€our€societyŠ tÄ Šshould€have€ready€access€to€the€independent€professional€services€of€a€lawyer€of€integrity€andŠ ZŖ Šcompetence.šš€€ņņSeeóó€€Tenn.€Sup.€Ct.€R.€8,€E„C€1„1.€€Accordingly,€attorneys€are€encouraged€toŠ @ Šparticipate€in€ņņpro€bonoóó€work.€€ņņSee€generallyóó€€Tenn.€Sup.€Ct.€R.€8,€E„C€2„1;€E„C€2„16;€E„C€2„25.€€Š &v ŠIndeed,€š šthe€rendition€of€free€legal€services€to€those€unable€to€pay€reasonable€fees€continues€to€beŠ  \ Šan€obligation€of€each€lawyer.€.€.€.šš€€Tenn.€Sup.€Ct.€R.€8,€E„C€2„25.€€Thus,€even€though€a€ņņš špro€bonoóó,ššŠ ņB Šor,€as€in€this€case,€an€appointed€case,€may€cause€personal€financial€hardship€to€counsel,€counselŠ Ų( Šshould€not€seek€to€be€excused€from€undertaking€the€representation€except€for€compelling€reasons.€Š ¾ ŠņņSeeóó€€Tenn.€Sup.€Ct.€R.€8,€E„C€2„29.€€Once€appointed€to€represent€an€indigent€defendant,ņņóó€counsel€isŠ ¤ō Šobliged€to€competently€handle€the€matter,€including€adequate€preparation€of€the€case.€€ņņSeeóó€€Tenn.Š Š Ś ŠSup.€Ct.€R.€8,€DR€6„101.€€Additionally,€counsel€must€undertake€zealous€representation€of€his€or€herŠ p!Ą  Šindigent€client€within€the€bounds€of€the€law.€€ņņSeeóó€€Tenn.€Sup.€Ct.€R.€8,€DR€7„101;€DR€7„102.Š V"¦! ŠĢą  ąUnder€ņņStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€an€aggrieved€defendant€must€demonstrate€actualŠ "$r# Šsubstandard€performance€and€prejudice€by€counsel.€€A€blanket€claim€that€the€fee€schedule€establishedŠ %X $ Šfor€counsel€appointed€in€indigent€capital€defendant€cases€in€Tennessee€does€not€suffice€to€meet€theŠ ī%>!% Šburden.€€Thus,€we€decline€to€hold€that€the€out„of„court€fee€schedule€applied€to€private€attorneysŠ Ō&$"& Šā āappointed€to€represent€indigent€capital€defendants€ņņóónecessarily€renders€any€representation€ineffectiveŠ ŗ' #' Šbecause€of€the€financial€burden€on€counsel.׃ׯ ƒ #ĆŻņņŚ  Ś10Ś  ŚóóŻ  Ż×  ׀€ņņSee€generallyóó€€ņņEx€parte€Darrell€Graysonóó,€479€So.2dŠ ° Šā ā75€(Ala.€1985)€(statutory€compensation€of€counsel€for€indigent€defendant€is€not€unconstitutional);Š –ę ŠņņPeople€v.€District€Court€of€El€Paso€Countyóó,€761€P.2d€206€(Colo.€1988)€(ņņen€bancóó)€(limitation€on€feesŠ |Ģ Špaid€to€appointed€counsel€do€not€ņņper€seóó€deprive€defendant€of€effective€assistance€of€counsel);€ņņPeopleŠ b² Šv.€Johnsonóó,€463€N.W.2d€171€(Mich.€App.€1990)€(fixed€fee€schedule€for€assigned€counsel€does€notŠ H˜ Šviolate€indigent€defendantsšš€rights€to€counsel);€ņņWebb€v.€Commonwealthóó,€528€S.E.2d€138€(Va.€2000)Š . ~ Š(fee€schedule€for€appointed€counsel€is€not€so€inadequate€as€to€violate€the€Sixth€or€FourteenthŠ  d ŠAmendments).€€ņņBut€seeóó€€ņņArnold€v.€Kempóó,€813€S.W.2d€770€(1991)€(statutory€cap€on€attorneyššs€feesŠ ś J Šfor€indigent€capital€defendant€unconstitutional);€ņņState€v.€Lynchóó,€769€P.2d€816€(Okla.€1990)€(ņņsameóó);Š ą 0 ŠņņBaileyóó,€424€S.E.2d€at€503€(ņņsameóó).€€Moreover,€the€claims€of€specific€incompetence€and€negligenceŠ Ę   Šalleged€by€the€appellant€and€its€resultant€prejudice€are€not€supported€by€the€record.€€This€claim€isŠ ¬ ü  Šwithout€merit.€€Š ’ā  Šņ ņĢą@Ń Ń ģąE.€Failure€to€properly€conduct€mitigation€investigationˆŠ ^®  Šą  ąĢą  ąó óThe€appellant€claims€that€trial€counsel€was€ineffective€š šby€failing€to€conduct€a€reasonable€andŠ *z  Šcompetent€mitigation€investigation,€by€usurping€the€function€of€specialized€experts€in€this€area,€byŠ ` Šfocusing€upon€a€mitigation€theory€which€was€neither€investigated€nor€corroborated,€and€by€ignoring,Š öF Šoverlooking€or€unjustifiably€rejecting€significant€evidence€of€mitigation€which€was€never€pursuedŠ Ü, Šand€never€presented€to€the€jury.šš€€Specifically,€he€contends€that,€in€the€absence€of€a€sufficientŠ Ā Šmitigation€investigation,€the€appellant€š šwas€defined€to€the€jury€by€the€worst€times€of€his€life,€not€inŠ Øų Šthe€broader€context€where€he€would€be€reflected€in€a€more€positive€and€more€sympathetic€light€thanŠ ŽŽ Šthe€crime€depicted.ššņ ņ€€ó óŠ tÄ ŠĢą  ąThe€mitigation€theory€adopted€by€the€defense€team€focused€upon€a€self„reported€homosexualŠ @ Šrape€occurring€when€the€appellant€was€twelve€years€old.€€He€contends€that€counsel€failed€to€obtainŠ &v Špertinent€records,€including€prison,€medical,€educational€and€parole€records,€which€would€haveŠ  \ Šreflected€mitigation€themes€contrary€to€that€asserted€by€defense€counsel.€€The€appellant€also€assertsŠ ņB Šthat€counsel€failed€to€locate€numerous€lay€witnesses,€such€as€friends,€teachers,€classmates,€co„Š Ų( Šworkers,€juvenile€authorities,€and€jail€personnel€to€testify€regarding€the€appellantššs€life€andŠ ¾ Šexperiences.€€In€sum,€the€appellant€defines€counselššs€last€minute€effort€at€a€meaningful€mitigationŠ ¤ō Šinvestigation€as€a€š šhelter€skelter€intense€effort€to€prepare€a€case€for€trial€in€two€months,šš€which€madeŠ Š Ś Šit€š šabsolutely€impossible€to€present€a€coherent,€much€less,€credible€presentation€to€the€jury€to€spareŠ p!Ą  Šthe€life€of€Henry€Hodges.šš€€Indeed,€he€asserts€that€counselššs€premature€commitment€to€an€unverifiedŠ V"¦! Šand€uninvestigated€mitigation€theme,€ņņi.e.óó€isolated€homosexual€rape,€caused€defense€counsel€to€reject,Š <#Œ" Šignore,€or€overlook€powerful€mitigation€evidence€which€opened€up€numerous€avenues€to€defend€theŠ "$r# Šappellant€against€death.€€Additionally,€the€appellant€contends€that,€had€counsel€performed€anŠ %X $ Šadequate€investigation,€the€following€positive€themes€could€have€been€presented€to€the€jury:€(1)€theŠ ī%>!% Šappellant€was€š šstarved€for€positive€reinforcement€and€wanted€to€please€his€elders€when€he€wasŠ Ō&$"& Šā ātwelve€years€old;šš€€(2)€the€appellant€was€š šextremely€motivated€and€performed€very€wellšš€in€aŠ ŗ' #' Šstructured€environment;€(3)€the€appellant€š šresponded€well€to€praise€and€encouragement;šš€and€(4)€theŠ ° Šappellant€was€a€š šfolloweršš€and€susceptible€to€outside€influence.Š –ę Šā āĢĢĢą  ąThe€post„conviction€court€made€the€following€findings€and€conclusions€regarding€this€claim:Š . ~ Šą8  ą[A]ppellant€now€contends€that€perhaps€a€psychologist€and€a€psychological€examinerŠ  d Šshould€have€been€called,€but€they€were€not€called€at€the€January€1999€hearing.€Š ś J ŠPerhaps€there€was€more€family€history€that€could€be€helpful€or€school€records€orŠ ą 0 Šneighbors,€but€none€were€called€at€the€January€1999€hearing.€€The€only€newŠ Ę   Šinformation€presented€were€some€records€from€a€juvenile€institution€but€these€wereŠ ¬ ü  Šcumulative€to€information€presented€at€trial€in€1992.Š’ā Š Š  ŠĢą8  ąThe€[appellant]€with€an€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€claim€must€not€only€allegeŠ ^®  Šprejudice,€but€must€prove€prejudice€by€competent€evidence.€€If€the€[appellant]€saysŠ D”  Šhis€lawyer€failed€to€put€on€certain€evidence,€the€[appellant]€must€produce€thatŠ *z  Ševidence,€to€not€only€show€the€fact€finder€that€the€evidence€is€producible,€but€that€theŠ ` Ševidence€would€have€been€helpful.€€If€the€claim€is€based€on€a€failure€to€properlyŠ öF Šinvestigate,€then€the€evidence€or€witness€must€be€produced€so€that€the€trial€judge€canŠ Ü, Šproperly€evaluate€the€evidence€or€the€witness.€€ņņSeeóó€€ņņBlack€v.€Stateóó,€794€S.W.2d€752Š Ā Š(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990);€ņņsee€alsoóó€€ņņBrown€v.€McGinnisóó,€922€F.2d€425€(7ņņthóó€Cir.€1991)Š Øų Šand€ņņGoode€v.€Armentroutóó,€925€F.2d€239€(8ņņthóó€Cir.€1991).ŠŽŽŠ Š  ŠĢą8  ąHere,€the€defense€had€a€theory€of€mitigation€in€the€1992€trial.€This€centered€aroundŠ ZŖ Šthe€sexual€abuse€of€the€[appellant]€when€he€was€twelve.€€The€defense€presentedŠ @ Ševidence€that€the€killing€at€issue€in€this€case€was€motivated€by€a€subconscious€desireŠ &v Šfor€revenge€for€the€sexual€abuse€inflicted€upon€him€and€for€rage€at€the€discovery€byŠ  \ Šhis€family€of€his€homosexuality.€€This€theory€was€supported€by€the€testimony€of€Dr.Š ņB ŠBarry€Nurcombe€who€is€the€head€of€Child€Psychiatry€at€Vanderbilt€Medical€School.€Š Ų( ŠDr.€Nurcombe€was€an€impressive€witness.€€He€was€not€a€professional€witness€andŠ ¾ Šseldom€testified€in€court.€€He€was€well€versed€in€the€[appellantššs]€prior€background,Š ¤ō Šand€well€articulated€the€defense€theory.€€At€trial,€Dr.€Nurcombe€explained:ŠŠ ŚŠ Š  ŠĢą8  ąą8` Š Š ąI€had€available€to€me€extensive€documentation€concerningŠ V"¦! Š[appellantššs]€school€record,€his€legal€record,€his€mental€health€record.€Š <#Œ" ŠI€also€had€available€to€me€extensive€investigation€done€by€a€privateŠ "$r# Šinvestigation€group€concerning€his€family€background€and€earlyŠ %X $ Šdevelopment.€€I€have€interviewed€[appellant]€for€nine€hours€on€three€„Š ī%>!% Š„€a€total€of€nine€hours€on€three€separate€occasions.€€I€also€had€aŠ Ō&$"& Štelephone€interview€with€[appellant]€which€lasted€approximately€oneŠ ŗ' #' Šhour.€€I€had€access€to€five€separate€psychological€testings€of€this€man,Š  (š#( Šbeginning€at€the€age€of€twelve€and€continuing€through€lateŠ †)Ö$) Šadolescence.Šl*¼%*` x` x Šā āŠ R+¢&+ Šą8  ąThis€theory€was€further€supported€by€the€lay€witnesses€including€the€[appellantššs]Š ° Šā āmother€who€testified€at€the€sentencing€hearing.Š–ęŠ Š  ŠĢą8  ąThe€Court€recognizes€the€ease€in€which€a€lawyer€who€analyzes€a€case€in€hindsightŠ b² Šwill€find€that€the€tactics€used€by€an€unsuccessful€trial€lawyer€were€erroneous.€€It€isŠ H˜ Šeasy€after€the€fact€to€conclude€that€the€wrong€tactic€was€used€and€another€strategyŠ . ~ Šmight€have€been€more€successful.€€Just€like€a€football€coach€who€calls€anŠ  d Šunsuccessful€play€as€time€runs€out€or€the€General€who€attacks€too€late€in€the€day€andŠ ś J Šloses€the€battle;€itššs€always€said€that€š šhe€should€have€done€something€else.šš€€This€isŠ ą 0 Ša€temptation€that€the€Court€must€resist.€€The€tactics€and€decisions€made€by€trialŠ Ę   Šcounsel€in€this€case€were€in€all€respects€reasonable€at€the€time€they€were€made.Ь ü Š Š  ŠĢą8  ąTheņ ņ€ó óCourt€concludes€that€the€[appellant]€was€not€denied€effective€assistance€ofŠ xČ  Šcounsel€at€the€sentencing€hearing.€€His€trial€counsel€investigated€his€background,Š ^®  Špresented€the€jury€with€evidence€regarding€the€[appellantššs]€background,€andŠ D”  Šsupported€this€by€a€well„qualified€expert€witness.€.€.€.Š*z Š Š  ŠĢą  ąBecause€the€appellant€has€failed€to€include€the€transcript€of€the€sentencing€hearing€in€theŠ öF Šrecord€before€this€court,€the€summary€of€the€trial€testimony€provided€by€this€court€on€direct€appealŠ Ü, Šis€helpful€in€assessing€the€allegation€of€inadequate€investigation.€€At€the€sentencing€phase,Š Ā ŠĢą8  ą[t]he€appellant€presented€evidence€to€mitigate€his€punishment€for€this€murder.€HeŠ ŽŽ Špresented€evidence€of€his€childhood,€his€family€life,€the€sexual€abuse€he€sufferedŠ tÄ Šwhen€he€was€twelve€years€of€age,€his€mental€illness€or€disturbance,€[Trina]€BrownššsŠ ZŖ Šalleged€dominance€of€him,€his€immaturity,€and€his€drug€abuse.Š@Š Š  ŠĢą8  ąThe€appellantššs€mother€and€father€maintained€a€š šcommon€lawšš€marriage€that€lastedŠ  \ Šeighteen€years.€€The€appellant€and€one€brother€were€born€to€this€relationship.€€TheŠ ņB Šappellantššs€mother€was€the€victim€of€severe€spouse€abuse€during€the€relationship.€€ŠŲ(Š Š  ŠĢą8  ąAccording€to€family€members,€the€appellant€was€his€fatherššs€favorite.€€The€appellantŠ ¤ō Šwas€never€punished€while€his€brother€and€two€half„brothers€were€the€subject€of€harshŠ Š Ś Špunishment.€€If€the€appellantššs€mother€punished€him,€his€father€would€become€angryŠ p!Ą  Šat€her.€€The€appellantššs€mother€and€half„brother€described€the€appellant€as€š šspoiled.šš€Š V"¦! ŠThe€half„brother€stated€that€the€appellant€could€do€whatever€he€desired€without€fearŠ <#Œ" Šof€punishment.Š"$r#Š Š  ŠĢą8  ąThe€record€reveals€that€the€appellant€lived€a€normal€life€until€he€was€twelve€years€ofŠ ī%>!% Šage.€€When€he€reached€this€age,€he€refused€to€go€to€school,€began€to€associate€withŠ Ō&$"& Šolder€men,€and€started€sniffing€glue€š!š€anything€that€would€make€him€š šhigh.šš€€HeŠ ŗ' #' Šfrequently€ran€away€from€home€and€occasionally€would€stay€away€for€weeks€beforeŠ  (š#( Šreturning€home.€€Although€the€appellantššs€mother€moved€the€family€frequently,€theŠ †)Ö$) Šappellantššs€lifestyle€did€not€change.€€He€was€in€custody€of€juvenile€authorities€onŠ l*¼%* Šsixteen€different€occasions.€While€confined€to€a€juvenile€treatment€facility€inŠ R+¢&+ ŠChattanooga,€the€appellant€escaped.€€He€subsequently€committed€several€seriousŠ 8,ˆ', Šoffenses,€which€resulted€in€his€convictions€for€robbery€with€a€deadly€weapon,€simpleŠ ° Šrobbery,€and€an€attempt€to€commit€a€felony€kidnapping.Š–ęŠ Š  ŠĢą8  ąThe€appellantššs€maternal€grandfather€was€an€alcoholic.€€One€of€the€appellantššs€half„Š b² Šbrothers€is€a€recovering€alcoholic.€€The€appellant€has€a€history€of€abusing€marijuana.€Š H˜ ŠHe€smoked€as€many€as€eight€marijuana€cigarettes€in€a€twenty„four„hour€period.Š. ~Š Š  ŠĢą8  ąThe€appellant€testified€that€he€was€sexually€abused€by€a€complete€stranger€when€heŠ ś J Šwas€twelve€years€of€age.€€However,€he€never€revealed€this€abuse€to€any€member€ofŠ ą 0 Šhis€family.€€Nor€did€he€tell€the€juvenile€authorities€or€the€Tennessee€prison€officialsŠ Ę   Šthat€he€had€been€sexually€abused.€€The€sexual€abuse€did€not€surface€until€he€had€beenŠ ¬ ü  Šarrested€for€the€Fulton€County,€Georgia€murder.€€He€related€this€to€an€official€at€theŠ ’ā  ŠGeorgia€Diagnostic€Center.€€The€appellant€refused€to€tell€his€parents€about€the€sexualŠ xČ  Šabuse€because€his€father€was€homophobic€and€the€appellant€felt€his€mother€wouldŠ ^®  Šblame€him€for€the€occurrence.€€He€did€not€tell€the€juvenile€authorities€because€heŠ D”  Šknew€they€would€tell€his€mother.Š*z Š Š  ŠĢą8  ąShortly€after€the€sexual€abuse€incident,€the€appellant€made€his€brother€performŠ öF Šfellatio€on€him.€€He€took€a€young€female€cousin€into€a€closet€for€the€purpose€ofŠ Ü, Šengaging€in€sexual€conduct.€€When€the€murder€occurred,€he€was€living€with€TrinaŠ Ā ŠBrown.€€He€was€also€engaging€in€homosexual€male€prostitution.ŠØųŠ Š  ŠĢą8  ąThe€appellantššs€mother€opined€that€fifteen„year„old€Trina€Brown€completelyŠ tÄ Šdominated€the€appellant.€€Trina€Brown€testified€that€the€appellant€did€not€want€to€killŠ ZŖ Šthe€victim€and€that€it€was€she,€not€the€appellant,€who€made€the€decision€to€kill€theŠ @ Švictim.€€She€was€afraid€that€if€the€victim€was€permitted€to€live,€he€would€have€theŠ &v Šappellant€arrested,€and€as€a€result,€she€would€lose€the€appellant.€€Therefore,€she€toldŠ  \ Šthe€appellant€to€kill€the€victim.€€The€appellant€admitted€on€cross„examination€thatŠ ņB Šboth€he€and€Brown€tried€to€manipulate€each€other.€€He€admitted€that€he€hadŠ Ų( Špreviously€stated€that€Brown€š šwould€jump€off€a€buildingšš€if€he€asked€her.оРР ŠĢą8  ąDr.€Barry€Nurcombe,€a€child€psychiatrist,€testified€as€an€expert€for€the€defense.€€HeŠ Š Ś Šdescribed€the€appellant€as€having€an€antisocial€personality€disorder.€€He€outlined€theŠ p!Ą  Šappellantššs€family€life,€his€childhood,€the€incident€involving€sexual€abuse,€his€drugŠ V"¦! Šdependance,€the€murder,€his€relationship€with€Brown,€his€difficulty€coping€withŠ <#Œ" Šstress,€his€poor€judgment,€which€was€aggravated€by€the€use€of€marijuana,€and€otherŠ "$r# Šfacts€prior€to€expressing€his€professional€opinion.€€He€concluded€that€the€appellantŠ %X $ Šhad€a€low€self„esteem.€€He€also€concluded€that€although€a€grown€man,€the€appellantŠ ī%>!% Šreacts€the€same€as€a€seven€or€eight„year„old€child.€€He€found€that€the€appellant€hadŠ Ō&$"& Šestablished€the€rudiments€of€psychological€disturbance€prior€to€the€incident€involvingŠ ŗ' #' Šsexual€abuse.Š (š#(Š Š  ŠĢą8  ąAccording€to€Dr.€Nurcombe,€the€appellant€wanted€revenge€for€the€sexual€abuse€thatŠ l*¼%* Šhe€encountered€in€his€childhood;€and€he€viewed€homosexuals€as€a€class€rather€thanŠ R+¢&+ Šindividuals.€€Nurcombe€related€that€Brown€had€told€the€appellantššs€sister„in„law€theŠ 8,ˆ', Šappellant€was€a€homosexual.€€This€was€related€by€the€sister„in„law€to€the€appellantššsŠ ° Šhalf„brother,€who€confronted€the€appellant€with€this€fact.€Dr.€Nurcombe€opined€thatŠ –ę Šthe€stress€resulting€from€this€incident,€coupled€with€the€fact€that€the€appellantššsŠ |Ģ Šfamily€might€discover€his€homosexual€lifestyle,€motivated€the€appellant€to€kill€theŠ b² Švictim,€š!š€the€next€homosexual€that€propositioned€him.ŠH˜Š Š  ŠĢą8  ąThe€appellant€told€Dr.€Nurcombe€that€š šhe€did€not€wish€to€be€thought€[of€as]€crazy,Š  d Šthat€he€felt€that€he€did€things€deliberately€[on€the€night€in€question,€and]€that€anyŠ ś J Šattempt€to€explain€what€he€had€done€on€psychological€grounds€was€hogwash.šš€€Šą 0Š Š  Šą8  ą.€.€.ŠĘ  Š Š  ŠĢÓÓņņState€v.€Henry€Eugene€Hodgesóó,€No.€01C01„9212„CR„00382.Š ’ā  Šņ ņÓÓą  ąó óAlthough€our€supreme€court€has€observed€that€there€is€no€legal€requirement€and€noŠ ^®  Šestablished€practice€that€the€accused€must€offer€evidence€at€the€penalty€phase€of€a€capital€trial,€€ņņStateŠ D”  Šv.€Melsonóó,€772€S.W.2d€417,€421€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.),€ņņcert.€deniedóó,€493€U.S.€874,€110€S.Ct.€211Š *z  Š(1989),€we€are€cognizant€of€the€fact€that€the€basic€concerns€of€counsel€during€a€capital€sentencingŠ ` Šproceeding€are€to€neutralize€the€aggravating€circumstances€advanced€by€the€State€and€to€presentŠ öF Šmitigating€evidence€on€behalf€of€the€defendant.€€Thus,€although€there€is€no€requirement€that€defenseŠ Ü, Šcounsel€present€mitigating€evidence€in€the€sentencing€phase€of€a€capital€trial,€counselš