ÿWPC  ÷†b¾éª‹F‘£lfªŽFGö&×TÌ»zq©ÙKW *¢$åƒ ‹“’~.r) Hã+JCQˆþY%Vxâ’•âÅw“è)5ŒtÐC÷Š?' q‹#Œ¡P;ôâ-™ðÔÙbCaµ½Þhîbhf¦>ZaÕÓœ²”½>ìéóÆÊžÇYþ3ƒrñ˜¹oì÷ƒ2‘YÊÎd˯ç´d…¡k>ÒâÇïÁ=‘pÔ:I«Œû¡È¸+6ÄØÇÅÔ¢ñ”c–,‡¨±Ñ^&ÓýÙr¦¨Åg€ª­åšZ±œ¬ æá~¿‡;ÊdþšF@U‰–ë·¥­ó¨öê™ù«}6 ¼ŸT[Vc:u‘£RR?sÊýžÊìøè{‰¿÷#³´c˜jÙ®µÌéÙŠ2wÛ#ÿ±,p§å:¢zïÆë}+à ’µjú¬ž^8~ZEžnFÞšSê;ϲë/4扭Å~ærʯT,ÊBÔ{zš`ÉŒ—§ iø·dYýadú(Ñò;§›“`÷¨¡IcWöšU¿ó_¿P‰Ci(êWåï|>81ô¨½%:h³ÚÕ®¤¶Xù,ëOõ\äÌ÷KN@ÿìd—6}¼`Â'@ÑÆ2+héçOb#É\ %% UN+ 0ˆy U N ^ O w[ z_ ÒÙ 4« ¿ Î mÐ Æç Æ­ ÆsÆ9 0DÿNCÄEˆ E‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘‘b““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““““ 0ë›››› B†† 0¤£ D5G D-| 0K©© ASôÆG 0¤  0D± A«õ˜\\IB01S02\CLERKJACÈÈ,,,,ÈÈ0»(ÖÃ9 Z‹6Times New Roman Regular(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular"sp1Ï  ˜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 ~‰/ê:i¢×+003|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó  P.J.MosierT.C.A.clealyLockhartFretwellWhitesidemy myRasnakeBlockburgera]lmostOvertonHellardc]onductYasmondFendersonevidentiar[yBurkhartCoffeltHesselrodePaulman ~Ô_ÔÓ  Óà  àòòÔ‡ô²ìò¤»Ô1óóÔ#†»š)»òô²ì+#ÔÔ‡ô²ìò»»š)ÔPost„conviction€counselððs€specific€argument€on€appeal€is€that€the€petitionerððs€ð ðrights€to€due€processðð€wereÐ ° Ðð ðaffectedðð€by€trial€counselððs€failure€to€raise€and€litigate€ð ðtheseðð€issues,€presumably€referring€to€the€petitionerððs€multipleÐ qÁ Ðconvictions.€€òòóóHowever,€any€argument€based€on€òòState€v.€Anthonyóó,€817€S.W.2d€299€(Tenn.€1991),€for€the€claim€that€theÐ 2‚ Ðpetitionerððs€due€process€rights€were€violated€because€a€person€cannot€be€convicted€of€kidnapping€and€escape,€asÐ óC Ðð ðkidnapping€merged€with€the€offense€of€escape,ðð€was€resolved€against€the€petitioner€in€òòState€v.€Dixonóó,€957€S.W.2d€532Ð ´ Ð(Tenn.€1997).€€òòSee€alsoóó€òòState€v.€€Billy€J.€Coffeltóó,€No.€M2002-01214-CCA-R3-CD,€2003€WL€22116628€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð uÅ ÐApp.€Sept.€11,€2003),€òòperm.€to€appeal€deniedóó€(Tenn.€Feb.€2,€2004).Ð 6 † ЀÔ#†»š)»òô²ìq#Ô- ù-(|G2,ª$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€š)»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ô²ìò»»Ô d(|3¿ $££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€š)»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV)ÿÿ!dxdx)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3¿ $¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€š)»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€š)»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÑ  ÑÔ€¼š)»»»ÔÑ8€Þ'XXdé»»d8Ñà@hhìàÔ‡îxš)ÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@òò%ìàAT€JACKSONÔ#†¼š)»îîx #ԈРÓ# ÐÓ  Óà @ àà @` àAssigned€on€Briefs€September€14,€2004Ð öF ÐÔ‡XÞ'X»¼š)ÔÌò òÔ#†¼š)»XXÞ'!#ÔMICHAEL€S.€HOLMESòòóó€v.€STATE€OF€TENNESSEEÔ‡XÞ'X»¼š)Ôó óÐ ï? ÐÌà@@½½ìàò ò€Appeal€from€the€Circuit€Court€for€Chester€CountyÐ é 9 Ðà@@øøìàNo.€4302€€€€€€Roy€B.€Morgan,€Jr.,€JudgeÐ Ó # ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<` AßÐ ‘á  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€W2003„02712„CCA„R3„PC€€„€Filed€November€15,€Ô_Ô2004Ô_ÔÐ ŠÚ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<]` AßÐ ^®  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓÔ‡X;nXXXÞ'ÔThe€petitioner,€Michael€S.€Holmes,€was€convicted€in€1997€of€aggravated€robbery,€aggravatedÐ V¦  Ðassault,€aggravated€Ô_ÔkidnappingÔ_Ô,€felony€escape,€burglary€of€a€vehicle,€and€theft€of€property€overÐ ? Ð$1000.€€His€convictions€were€affirmed€on€direct€appeal.€€Subsequently,€he€filed€a€petition€for€post„Ð (x Ðconviction€relief€alleging€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€and€improper€jury€instructions€on€lesser„Ð a Ðincluded€offenses.€€After€a€review€of€the€affidavits€submitted€by€the€petitioner,€the€post„convictionÐ úJ Ðcourt€denied€the€petition,€and€this€appeal€followed.€€We€affirm€the€order€of€the€post„conviction€courtÐ ã3 Ðdenying€the€petition.Ô#†XÞ'XXX;nÂ#ÔÔ#†¼š)»XXÞ'”#ÔÔ‡XÞ'X»¼š)ÔÐ Ì ÐÓ¶ÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3€Appeal€as€of€Right;€Judgment€of€the€Circuit€Court€Affirmedó óÐ žî ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼š)»àXÞ')#ÔÔ‡XÞ'X.¼š)ÔAlan€E.€Glenn,€J.óó,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòGary€R.€Wade,€P.J.,óó€and€òòNormaÐ qÁ ÐMcGee€Ogle,€J.óó,€joined.Ð Zª ÐÌMike€Mosier,€Jackson,€Tennessee,€for€the€appellant,€Michael€S.€Holmes.Ð ,| ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€and€Reporter;€Michael€Markham,€Assistant€Attorney€General;Ð þN ÐJames€G.€Ô_ÔWoodallÔ_Ô,€District€Attorney€General;€and€Al€Earls,€Assistant€District€Attorney€General,€forÐ ç 7  Ðthe€appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ô#†¼š)»XXÞ' #ÔÔ‡XÞ'X»¼š)ԀРÐ! ! ÐÓÚÓÌà@@OO&ìàò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼š)»XXÞ' #ÔÔ‡XÞ'X»¼š)ÔÐ ¢#ò# ÐÌò òòòFACTSóóó óÐ u%Å % ÐÌòòóóÔ#†¼š)»XXÞ' #ÔÓ  ÓÔ€XÞ'X»¼š)ÔÔ‡X;nXXXÞ'Ôà  àIn€the€direct€appeal,€this€court€set€out€the€facts€of€the€petitionerððs€escape€from€the€ChesterÐ H'˜"' ÐCounty€Jail,€which€had€resulted€in€his€convictions:Ð 1(#( ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àDefendant,€Michael€S.€Holmes,€was€a€federal€prisoner€housedÐ *S%* Ðat€the€Chester€County€jail€pursuant€to€a€contract€with€the€UnitedÐ ì*<&+ ÐStates€Marshal€Service.€€He€was€convicted€on€federal€drug€charges€inÐ Õ+%', Ðâ âFebruary€of€1995€and€was€awaiting€sentencing€on€those€charges.€€AtÐ ¾,(-ý ÐÔ_Ôapproximately€12:15€a.m.€on€January€4,€1996,€he€and€anotherÐ ° Ðprisoner,€Sherman€Sanders,€executed€an€escape€plan.Йé` x` x Ðâ âà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÐ ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àThe€jailer,€Shane€Hesselrode,€was€lured€into€the€hallway€nearÐ k» Ðdefendant's€cell€to€assist€a€maximum€security€prisoner€who€allegedlyÐ T¤ Ðneeded€medical€attention.€€Hesselrode€opened€the€door€to€the€entryÐ =  Ðhall€and€observed€defendant€and€Sanders€exit€their€cells.€€SandersÐ & v Ðplaced€a€home-made€knife,€described€as€a€"shank,"€at€the€jailer's€backÐ  _ Ðand€ordered€him€to€enter€the€cell€and€drop€his€keys.Ðø H` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÐ ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àSimultaneously,€defendant€went€to€the€dispatcher's€officeÐ Ê   Ðwhere€Barbara€Paulman€was€on€duty.€€He€rushed€at€her€and€threw€herÐ ³  Ðout€of€her€chair€onto€the€concrete€floor.€€She€struggled€with€defendantÐ œì  Ðas€he€dragged€her€along€the€floor€to€the€jail€cell€while€jabbing€at€herÐ …Õ  Ðwith€a€"shank."€€€By€the€time€they€reached€the€cell,€her€blouse€and€braÐ n¾  Ðwere€completely€torn,€and€the€zipper€was€ripped€out€of€her€pants.€Ð W§  ÐThe€dispatcher€suffered€bruising,€a€large€knot€on€her€head,€and€aÐ @ Ðserious€shoulder€injury€as€a€result€of€defendant's€actions.Ð)y` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÐ ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àAfter€locking€Hesselrode€and€Paulman€in€the€jail€cell,Ð ûK Ðdefendant€and€Sanders€made€their€way€out€of€the€jail€area€and€out€ofÐ ä4 Ðthe€building.€€It€was€later€discovered€they€took€Paulman's€keys€fromÐ Í Ðher€purse€and€absconded€with€her€car.à8@7` x` xàÐ ¶ Ðà8 ¸ àÐ Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àDefendant€was€convicted€of€aggravated€robbery€ofÐ ˆØ ÐHesselrode's€jail€keys,€aggravated€assault€and€aggravated€kidnappingÐ qÁ Ðof€Paulman,€felony€escape,€and€theft€of€Paulman's€vehicle.à8@¡` x` xàÐ Zª Ðà8 ¸ àÐ Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà ¸ àPrior€to€the€trial€on€these€state€charges,€defendant€pled€guiltyÐ ,| Ðin€federal€court€to€the€offense€of€escape€arising€from€these€incidents.Ðe` x` x ÐÌòòState€v.€Holmesóó,€995€S.W.2d€135,€138€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1998).€€€€€Ð ç 7 Ðà8  àÐ Ð Ð  Ðà  àThe€petitioner€filed€a€òòpro€seóó€petition€for€post„conviction€relief€on€April€10,€2000,€and€counselÐ ¹" ! Ðwas€appointed€on€May€8,€2000.€€A€hearing€was€scheduled€for€July€31,€2000;€however,€because€theÐ ¢#ò" Ðpetitioner€was€incarcerated€in€the€United€States€Bureau€of€Prisons,€which€refused€to€release€theÐ ‹$Û# Ðpetitioner€for€a€hearing€because,€according€to€the€continuance€order,€he€had€ð ðpreviously€escapedÐ t%Ä $ Ðfrom€the€Chester€County€Jail,ðð€the€post„conviction€court€ordered€a€continuance.€€On€October€17,Ð ]&­!% Ð2003,€a€hearing€was€conducted€in€which€the€sole€proof€was€an€affidavit€filed€by€the€petitioner,€stillÐ F'–"& Ðin€federal€custody,€and€one€filed€by€his€trial€counsel.€€The€court€denied€the€petition,€and€theÐ /(#' Ðpetitioner€filed€a€timely€appeal€to€this€court.Ð )h$( ÐÌà  àWe€will€review€the€claims€of€the€petitioner.€€He€asserted,€òòinter€aliaóó,€in€his€petition:Ð ê*:&* ÐÐ Ó+#'+ ÐÓ*°,XƒX" –X°œX*Óà8  àà8` Ð Ð à3.à " àPetitioner€states€that€this€conviction€is€unconstitutional€becauseÐ ° Ðthe€jury€never€received€any€instructions€from€the€court€that€informedÐ ™é Ðthe€jury€that€they€had€the€discretion€to€charge€the€[petitioner]€with€theÐ ‚Ò Ðlesser€included€charges,€pursuant€to€Tenn.€Rules€of€Court,€Rule€31.€Ð k» ÐTherefore,€the€jury€was€denied€the€option€to€consider€all€the€elementsÐ T¤ Ðof€the€crimes€charged€due€to€the€fact€that€the€court€never€instructedÐ =  Ðthe€jury€on€any€matters€of€the€law€in€this€case,€which€is€a€fundamentalÐ & v Ðreversible€error€that€must€be€corrected.€See€attached€supportingÐ  _ ÐMemorandum€of€Law.Ðø H` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÐ ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð à3.€[sic]€€Petitioner€states€that€T.C.A.€40„35„201€clealy€[sic]€informedÐ Ê   Ðthe€court€about€instructing€the€jury€of€all€possible€penalties€for€theÐ ³  Ðoffenses€charged€and€their€lesser€included€degrees,€in€which€the€courtÐ œì  Ðfail€[sic]€to€carry€out.à8h` x` xàà8ÀhphpàÐ…Õ ÀÀ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à4.à " àThe€court€failed€to€instruct€and€the€representing€court€appointedÐ W§  Ðfirst€year€law€student€failed€to€file€for€instruction€on€this€primaryÐ @ Ðprocedure€of€law,€therefore€a€[sic]€evidentiar[y]€hearing€isÐ )y Ðnecessitated€because€of€the€included€constitutional€violations.€€SeeÐ b Ðattached€supporting€Memorandum.ÐûK` x` x ÐÌà  àThe€affidavit€filed€by€the€petitioner€contained€fifteen€numbered€paragraphs€of€claims€forÐ Í Ðrelief.€€At€the€hearing€on€the€petition,€the€post„conviction€court€found€that€claims€1,€2,€3,€4,€5,€6,€12,Ð ¶ Ð13,€14,€and€15€had€been€previously€determined€on€direct€appeal.€€The€remaining€assertions€in€theÐ Ÿï Ðaffidavit€were€as€follows:Ð ˆØ ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à7.à " àI€received€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€in€that€my€appellateÐ Zª Ðcounsel€failed€to€raise€the€issue€of€the€trial€courtððs€denial€of€myÐ C“ Ðmotion€for€mistrial,€said€motion€entered€due€to€the€prosecutor€askedÐ ,| Ð[sic]€me,€in€front€of€the€jury,€if€I€was€on€probation€when€the€offensesÐ e Ðfor€which€I€was€being€tried€with€occurred,€said€occurrence€beingÐ þN Ðhighly€prejudicial€to€me,€and€rendered€the€outcome€of€my€trialÐ ç 7 Ðfundamental€[sic]€unfair€and€unreliable.€€See€òòLockhart€v.€Fretwellóó,Ð Ð!   Ð506€U.S.€364,€369;€òòNix€v.€Whitesideóó,€475€U.S.€157,€175à8@Ý` x` xàà8 @ à.й" !Ð Ð  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à8.à " àI€received€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€due€to€my€trialÐ ‹$Û# Ðcounselððs€and/or€appellate€counselððs€failure€to€raise€any€one,€or€all,Ð t%Ä $ Ðor€[sic]€the€issues€I€have€presented€in€these€post€conviction€reliefÐ ]&­!% Ðmotion€proceedings€or€said€counselððs€failure€to€competently€andÐ F'–"& Ðprofessionally€raise€any€one,€or€all,€or€the€issues€I€have€presented€inÐ /(#' Ðthese€post€conviction€relief€motion€proceedings.Ð)h$(` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à9.à " àI€received€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€in€that€my€trialÐ ê*:&* Ðcounsel€failed€to€seek€jury€instructions€on€lesser€included€offenses;Ð Ó+#'+ Ðin€that€my€my€[sic]€trial€counsel€waived€standard€preparation€of€juryÐ ° Ðinstructions;€and€due€to€my€counsel€failed€to€object€when€the€trialÐ ™é Ðcourt€failed€to€give€jury€instructions€on€lesser€included€offenses.€€TheÐ ‚Ò Ðprejudice€in€this€being€that€due€to€such€failures€the€jury€was€deniedÐ k» Ðthe€knowledge€that€the€jury€could€find€me€guilty€of€a€lesser€includedÐ T¤ Ðoffense€is€what€[sic]€I€was€guilty€of,€which€would€have€significantlyÐ =  Ðshortened€my€sentence.€€(citations€omitted).à8@ ` x` xàà8 @ àÐ& vÐ Ð  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à10.à " àI€received€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€in€violation€of€myÐ ø H ÐU.S.€Constitutional€òò6òòthóó€Amend.óó€rights€and€òò14òòthóó€Amend.óó€rights.à8@ˆ` x` xàà8@ˆƒàÐá 1 ` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à11.€€à " àMy€U.S.€Constitutional€Amend.€14€rights€were€violated€by€theÐ ³  Ðtrial€court,€by€the€prosecution,€and€by€my€attorney.Мì ` x` x ÐÌà  àIn€its€written€findings€of€fact€and€conclusions€of€law,€the€post„conviction€court€dealt€with€Ð n¾  Ðthe€remaining€claims,€determining€that€the€petition€should€be€denied:Ð W§  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à1.à " àThe€Court€finds€that€the€issues€raised€by€the€petitioner€have€à @ï àÐ )y Ðbeen€previously€raised€and€determined€by€the€Court€of€CriminalÐ b ÐAppeals.ÐûK` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à2.à " àAs€to€the€issue€of€the€failure€to€give€the€proper€jury€instructionsÐ Í Ðthe€Court€finds€that€the€appropriate€instructions€were€given€and€thatÐ ¶ Ðthe€Court€did€give€appropriate€instructions€as€certain€lesser€includedÐ Ÿï Ðoffenses€on€each€charge€in€the€indictment.€€The€jury€rejected€all€lesserÐ ˆØ Ðincluded€offenses€and€convicted€the€[petitioner]€as€charged€in€theÐ qÁ Ðindictment.ÐZª` x` x ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð à3.à " àThe€remaining€issues€deal€with€the€sufficiency€of€evidence€orÐ ,| Ðappropriateness€of€the€underlying€convictions€were€dealt€with€onÐ e Ðdirect€appeal€and€cannot€be€the€basis€of€post€conviction€relief.ÐþN` x` x Ðà  àà ` àThe€petition€is€therefore€denied.€Ð ç 7 ÐÌòòò òÓ  ÓANALYSISó óóóÐ ¹" ! ÐÓÝ6ÓÓ  Óò òÌó óÓ7Óà  àòòóóIn€order€to€determine€the€competence€of€counsel,€Tennessee€courts€have€applied€standardsÐ $Ý# Ðdeveloped€in€federal€case€law.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Tayloróó,€968€S.W.2d€900,€905€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1997)Ð v%Æ $ Ð(noting€that€the€same€standard€for€determining€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€that€is€applied€inÐ _&¯!% Ðfederal€cases€also€applies€in€Tennessee).€€The€United€States€Supreme€Court€articulated€the€standardÐ H'˜"& Ðin€òòStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466€U.S.€668,€104€S.€Ct.€2052,€80€L.€Ed.€2d€674€(1984),€which€isÐ 1(#' Ðwidely€accepted€as€the€appropriate€standard€for€all€claims€of€a€convicted€petitioner€that€counsel'sÐ )j$( Ðassistance€was€defective.€€The€standard€is€firmly€grounded€in€the€belief€that€counsel€plays€a€role€thatÐ *S%) Ðis€"critical€to€the€ability€of€the€adversarial€system€to€produce€just€results."€€òòId.óó€at€685,€104€S.€Ct.€atÐ ì*<&* Ð2063.€€The€òòStricklandóó€standard€is€a€two-prong€test:Ð Õ+%'+ Їà8  àà8` Ð Ð àFirst,€the€defendant€must€show€that€counsel's€performance€wasÐ ° Ðdeficient.€€This€requires€showing€that€counsel€made€errors€so€seriousÐ ™é Ðthat€counsel€was€not€functioning€as€the€"counsel"€guaranteed€theÐ ‚Ò Ðdefendant€by€the€Sixth€Amendment.€€Second,€the€defendant€mustÐ k» Ðshow€that€the€deficient€performance€prejudiced€the€defense.€€ThisÐ T¤ Ðrequires€showing€that€counsel's€errors€were€so€serious€as€to€depriveÐ =  Ðthe€defendant€of€a€fair€trial,€a€trial€whose€result€is€reliable.Ð& v` x` x ÐÌòòId.óó€at€687,€104€S.€Ct.€at€2064.€€The€òòStricklandóó€Court€further€explained€the€meaning€of€"deficientÐ ø H Ðperformance"€in€the€first€prong€of€the€test€in€the€following€way:Ð á 1  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àIn€any€case€presenting€an€ineffectiveness€claim,€the€performanceÐ ³  Ðinquiry€must€be€whether€counsel's€assistance€was€reasonableÐ œì  Ðconsidering€all€the€circumstances.€.€.€.€€No€particular€set€of€detailedÐ …Õ  Ðrules€for€counsel's€conduct€can€satisfactorily€take€account€of€theÐ n¾  Ðvariety€of€circumstances€faced€by€defense€counsel€or€the€range€ofÐ W§  Ðlegitimate€decisions€regarding€how€best€to€represent€a€criminalÐ @ Ðdefendant.à8` x` xàà8hÈÈàÐ)yhphp ÐòòÌId.óó€at€688-89,€104€S.€Ct.€at€2065.€€The€petitioner€must€establish€"that€counsel's€representation€fellÐ ûK Ðbelow€an€objective€standard€of€reasonableness€under€prevailing€professional€norms."€€òòHouse€v.€Stateóó,Ð ä4 Ð44€S.W.3d€508,€515€(Tenn.€2001)€(citing€òòGoad€v.€Stateóó,€938€S.W.2d€363,€369€(Tenn.€1996)).Ð Í ÐÌà  àAs€for€the€prejudice€prong€of€the€test,€the€òòStricklandóó€Court€stated:€"The€defendant€must€showÐ Ÿï Ðthat€there€is€a€reasonable€probability€that,€but€for€counsel's€unprofessional€errors,€the€result€of€theÐ ˆØ Ðproceeding€would€have€been€different.€€A€reasonable€probability€is€a€probability€sufficient€toÐ qÁ Ðundermine€confidence€in€the€outcome."€€466€U.S.€at€694,€104€S.€Ct.€at€2068;€òòsee€alsoóó€òòOverton€v.Ð Zª ÐStateóó,€874€S.W.2d€6,€11€(Tenn.€1994)€(concluding€that€petitioner€failed€to€establish€that€"there€is€aÐ C“ Ðreasonable€probability€that,€but€for€counsel's€errors,€the€outcome€of€the€proceedings€would€have€beenÐ ,| Ðdifferent").Ð e ÐÌà  àCourts€need€not€approach€the€òòStricklandóó€test€in€a€specific€order€or€even€"address€bothÐ ç 7 Ðcomponents€of€the€inquiry€if€the€defendant€makes€an€insufficient€showing€on€one."€€òòStricklandóó,€466Ð Ð!   ÐU.S.€at€697,€104€S.€Ct.€at€2069;€òòsee€alsoóó€òòGoadóó,€938€S.W.2d€at€370€(stating€that€"failure€to€proveÐ ¹" ! Ðeither€deficiency€or€prejudice€provides€a€sufficient€basis€to€deny€relief€on€the€ineffective€assistanceÐ ¢#ò" Ðclaim").Ð ‹$Û# ÐÌà  àBy€statute€in€Tennessee,€the€petitioner€at€a€post-conviction€relief€hearing€has€the€burden€ofÐ ]&­!% Ðproving€the€allegations€of€fact€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÐ F'–"& Ð40-30-210(f)€(1997).€€A€petition€based€on€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€is€a€single€ground€forÐ /(#' Ðrelief;€therefore,€all€factual€allegations€must€be€presented€in€one€claim.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ððÐ )h$( Ð40-30-206(d)€(1997).Ð *Q%) Ðâ âÔ#†XÞ'XXX;n· #ÔÔ‡X;nXXXÞ'ÔÐ ê*:&* Ðà  àAlthough€represented€by€counsel,€the€petitioner€filed€a€òòpro€seóó€brief€with€this€court,€as€wellÐ ° Ðâ âas€several€exhibits.€€However,€because€he€continues€to€be€represented€by€counsel,€we€will€limit€ourÐ ™é Ðanalysis€to€the€brief€and€argument€filed€by€counsel.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Burkhartóó,€541€S.W.2d€365,€371Ð ‚Ò Ð(Tenn.€1976)€(holding€that€a€defendant€who€is€represented€by€counsel€may€not€simultaneouslyÐ k» Ðproceed€òòpro€seóó).Ð T¤ ÐÌà  à€The€petitionerððs€claims€on€appeal€may€be€summarized€as€follows:€€(1)€trial€counsel€wasÐ & v Ðð ðineffective€for€failing€to€raise€the€issue€of€double€jeopardy€involving€his€conviction€for€various€andÐ  _ Ðmultiple€offensesðð;׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€and€(2)€the€trial€court€erred€by€failing€to€instruct€the€jury€on€lesser„includedÐ ø H Ðoffenses€and€trial€counsel€was€ineffective€for€failing€to€seek€jury€instructions€on€lesser„includedÐ á 1  Ðoffenses.Ð Ê   ÐÌà  àAs€to€the€double€jeopardy€claim,€the€post„conviction€court€correctly€concluded€that€this€courtÐ œì  Ðdetermined€on€direct€appeal€that€the€petitionerððs€multiple€convictions€did€not€constitute€doubleÐ …Õ  Ðjeopardy:Ð n¾  ÐÌà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà " àDefendant€asserts€that€the€aggravated€robbery,€aggravatedÐ @ Ðassault,€aggravated€kidnapping,€escape€and€theft€should€be€viewed€asÐ )y Ða€single€criminal€episode€with€a€single€criminal€intent:€€the€intent€toÐ b Ðescape.€€As€such,€the€defendant€argues€the€multiple€convictionsÐ ûK Ðviolate€the€principle€of€double€jeopardy.Ðä4` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÐ ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà " àòòState€v.€Dentonóó,€938€S.W.2d€373€(Tenn.€1996),€outlines€theÐ ¶ Ðproper€test€for€evaluating€a€double€jeopardy€claim.€€To€determineÐ Ÿï Ðwhether€multiple€convictions€are€permitted€we€must:€€(1)€conduct€aÐ ˆØ ÐòòBlockburgeróó€analysis€of€the€statutory€offenses;€(2)€analyze€theÐ qÁ Ðevidence€used€to€prove€the€offenses;€€(3)€consider€whether€there€wereÐ Zª Ðmultiple€victims€or€discrete€acts;€€and€(4)€compare€the€purposes€of€theÐ C“ Ðrespective€statutes.€€òòDentonóó,€938€S.W.2d€at€381.Ð,|` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÐ ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà " àUnder€òòBlockburger€v.€United€Statesóó,€284€U.S.€299,€52€S.€Ct.Ð þN Ð180,€76€L.€Ed.€306€(1932),€one€must€determine€whether€each€offenseÐ ç 7 Ðrequires€proof€of€an€additional€fact€which€the€other€does€not.€€All€fiveÐ Ð!   Ðof€the€subject€offenses€require€proof€of€additional€facts€not€includedÐ ¹" ! Ðin€each€of€the€other€offenses.Т#ò"` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àЋ$Û#` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà " àThe€same€evidence€was€not€used€to€establish€each€offense.€Ð ° ÐHesselrode€was€the€victim€of€the€aggravated€robbery€and€PaulmanÐ ™é Ðwas€the€victim€of€the€aggravated€assault,€aggravated€kidnapping€andÐ ‚Ò Ðtheft.€€Distinct€acts€were€committed€in€the€course€of€each€offense.Ðk»` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àÐ ` x` x Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà " àFinally,€a€comparison€of€the€statutes'€purposes€shows€that€eachÐ =  Ðoffense€protects€a€different€interest.€€Theft€is€a€property€offense;€Ð & v Ðescape,€an€offense€against€the€administration€of€government.€Ð  _ ÐAggravated€robbery,€aggravated€assault,€and€aggravated€kidnappingÐ ø H Ðare€all€offenses€against€the€person;€however,€they€too€have€elementsÐ á 1  Ðthat€distinguish€them€from€one€another.€€Further,€they€are€in€differentÐ Ê   Ðparts€of€the€criminal€code€which€reflects€a€legislative€intent€that€theyÐ ³  Ðbe€considered€distinct€offenses.Мì ` x` x Ðà8  àÐ Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà " àIf€this€court€were€to€accredit€the€defendant's€argument,€weÐ n¾  Ðwould€reach€an€untenable€result.€€Effectively,€Tennessee€would€beÐ W§  Ðprohibited€from€prosecuting€any€criminal€act,€no€matter€how€heinous,Ð @ Ðcommitted€in€the€course€of€an€inmate's€escape€other€than€the€escapeÐ )y Ðitself.Ðb` x` x Ðà8  àÐ Ð Ð  Ðà8  àà8` Ð Ð àà " àDefendant's€multiple€convictions€do€not€violate€double€jeopardyÐ ä4 Ðunder€òòDentonóó.€€The€multiple€convictions€are€proper.ÐÍ` x` x ÐÌòòHolmesóó,€995€S.W.2d€at€138„39.€€Accordingly,€this€matter€has€previously€been€resolved.Ð Ÿï ÐÌà  àThe€petitionerððs€second€claim€is€that€the€jury€was€not€instructed€as€to€any€lesser„includedÐ qÁ Ðoffenses.€€The€record€on€appeal€includes€the€portion€of€the€transcript€of€the€petitionerððs€trial€settingÐ Zª Ðout€the€jury€instructions.€€On€the€aggravated€assault€charges,€the€court€instructed€the€jury€as€to€theÐ C“ Ðlesser€offense€of€assault;€on€the€aggravated€robbery,€the€court€instructed€as€to€robbery,€as€well;€andÐ ,| Ðon€aggravated€kidnapping,€the€court€instructed€as€to€the€lesser€offenses€of€kidnapping€and€falseÐ e Ðimprisonment.€€The€petitioner€fails€to€acknowledge€in€either€his€post„conviction€petition€or€affidavitÐ þN Ðthat€the€jury€was€instructed€as€to€any€lesser€offenses.€€However,€his€claim€is€clearly€wrong,€as€theÐ ç 7 Ðpost„conviction€court€found,€that€the€jury€was€not€charged€as€to€lesser„included€offenses.€€Further,Ð Ð!   Ðeven€if€all€lesser€offenses€were€not€charged,€the€petitioner€has€failed€to€prove€that€he€was€prejudicedÐ ¹" ! Ðas€a€result,€because€of€the€fact€that€he€was€convicted€of€the€offenses€charged€in€the€indictment.€€Thus,Ð ¢#ò" Ðthe€record€supports€the€post„conviction€courtððs€determination€that€this€claim€is€without€merit.€€òòSeeóóÐ ‹$Û# ÐòòStricklandóó,€466€U.S.€at€694,€104€S.€Ct.€at€2068.Ô#†XÞ'XXX;nJ#ÔÔ‡X;nXXXÞ'ÔÐ t%Ä $ ÐÌà  àAdditionally,€we€note€that€as€to€the€lesser„included€offenses,€any€allegation€of€error€on€theÐ F'–"& Ðpart€of€the€trial€court€has€been€waived€for€failure€to€raise€it€on€direct€appeal.€€ð ðA€ground€for€reliefÐ /(#' Ðis€waived€if€the€petitioner€personally€or€through€an€attorney€failed€to€present€it€for€determination€inÐ )h$( Ðany€proceeding€before€a€court€of€competent€jurisdiction€in€which€the€ground€could€have€beenÐ *Q%) Ðpresented€.€.€.€.ðð€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„206(g)€(1997).€€We€have€previously€held€that€ð ð[a]lmostÐ ê*:&* Ðany€ground€for€relief,€except€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel,€could€be€raised€during€trial,€andÐ Ó+#'+ Ðfailure€to€do€so€will€be€deemed€a€waiver.ðð€€òòBlair€v.€Stateóó,€969€S.W.2d€423,€425€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ð ° Ð1997).€€The€petitioner€failed€to€explain€in€his€petition€or€in€the€affidavit€at€the€post„convictionÐ ™é Ðhearing€why€this€issue€was€not€raised€at€trial€or€on€direct€appeal.€€This€is€an€elementary€part€of€anyÐ ‚Ò Ðpetition€for€post„conviction€relief.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„204(e)€(1997).Ð k» ÐÌÓ  Óò òòòCONCLUSIONó óóóÐ =  ÐÓ  ÓÌà  àFollowing€our€review€of€the€record,€we€affirm€the€order€denying€the€petition€for€post„Ð  ` Ðconviction€relief.Ð ù I ÐÌà  àà ` àà " àà  àà h àà À àà  à_____________________________________Ð Ë   Ðà  àà ` àà " àà  àà h àà À àà  àALAN€E.€GLENN,€JUDGEÐ ´  Ðà  à€Ð í  ÐÔ#†XÞ'XXX;n.d#Ô