WPC 90NJn}o+ÛSn>G]7atiHubddFϋ”L9U V=xH,]aJG|b ϻ3ϓ%AHD8_UűlB(#C8Q.yi7Iٴzf 8MO'іQTHjŬȕxSFbGgL4{Q~;M"ZPVv0*!bD)KZ0G-0U@A@Xe,KVagţPIk溏wQ?40nݴk8 GU"}fhW=}ǩ3W,A΃)F+k_TSkBYE MW8_\q|׳gӚ lp` yG! rl^5U >$ 0 0l 0< 0 pF 0L D+ A- @ o @ e oo   0  0m 0" 0( AQ"PU Jr""" B-" BOl 0|#UN %-M3(7N_^ awm4q mb\  `&Times New Roman' ORIENTATION PARAGRAPH AOCUSER0AOCUSER .   6B 54Heading 1XXX         XXX64 '4Heading 2       XXX <:Default Para< :Body Text In X  X 6  4Body Text    'dxd&Draw Object <<=8C HKKKK  WPC i K513%)+-51d~ -  WPC i K513%)+-51d~ -  })..      !X3XX!XX3XX!X3  __ _(2}$  J!..      !X3XX!XX3XX!X3  ݃ Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Level 5(2}$  J!..      !X3XX!XX3XX!X3  (2}$  J!..      !X3XX!XX3XX!X3  ($C<< c     ѳkIA`2WP TypographicSymbols               )Hairline d  d#|x(r J$..      !XXX!XXXX!X\\IB01S02\CLERKJAC,,,,0(9 Z6Times New Roman Regular!X(d1 ~/U YarbroughMosleyCarnomasOakviewMelsonLockhartAfairBoykinAvoluntaryBlankenshipPettus- -  J!..      !X3XX!XX3XX!X3  _         3 p x (#X3SXX348!3!XXdd8  QhhpSINTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE  Q%ATJACKSONSpԈ    K.` hp x (#X(#KAssignedonBriefsJuly13,2004 > X3XSSXX3      &    JACQUELINEHURTv.STATEOFTENNESSEEF  "Ԍ 0 Ќ  X3XS  ': DirectAppealfromtheCriminalCourtforShelbyCounty  " No.P25587ArthurT.Bennett,Judge   -  ֘XX3  k[W$~ Kp@0 dd`  KEj K Kj2 -  X3X֘ No.W200400151CCAR3PCFiledNovember4,_2004_ _  -  ֘XX3  k[W$~ Kp@0 dd`  KE+ K K+2 -  X3X֘      M  Thepetitioner,JacquelineHurt,appealsthedenialofherpetitionforpostconvictionreliefin  p  whichsheassertedthatherpleawasnotknowingandvoluntaryandthatshewasdenied V effectiveassistanceofcounsel.Followingourreview,weaffirmthedenialofthepetition; < however,weremandthematterforthelimitedpurposeofentryofacorrectedjudgment.Mt݌ " Ќ     X     Tenn.R.App.P.3AppealasofRight;JudgmentoftheCriminalCourtAffirmed  andRemandedforEntryofCorrectedJudgment     X    JohnEverettWilliams,J.,deliveredtheopinionofthecourt,inwhichNormaMcGeeOgle P andAlanE.Glenn,JJ.,joined. 6 JacquelineHurt,Memphis,Tennessee,ProSe. R PaulG.Summers,AttorneyGeneralandReporter;HelenaWaltonYarbrough,Assistant  AttorneyGeneral;WilliamL.Gibbons,DistrictAttorneyGeneral;andJulieMosley,Assistant  DistrictAttorneyGeneral,fortheappellee,StateofTennessee.    OPINION L"" X3XXX3      &     FactsandProceduralHistory u   ? Ԍ $h$ Ќ   X3XXX3  '$i  X  OnMay8,2000,thepetitionerenteredpleasofguiltytotwocountsofattemptedfirst %4!& degreemurder,onecountofespeciallyaggravatedrobbery,andonecountofespecially &"' aggravatedkidnapping.Thepetitionerwassentencedtotwentyfiveyearsoneachofthefour '#( counts,withthetwoattemptedmurdersentencesrunningconsecutivelytooneanother.The (#) remainingcountswererunconcurrently,butconsecutivelytotheattemptedmurdercounts,for |)$* aneffectivesentenceofseventyfiveyears.ThisCourtaffirmedtheconvictionsandsentences b*%+ ondirectappeal.SeeStateofTennesseev.JacquelineHurt,No.W200002193CCAR3CD, H+&, 2001Tenn.Crim.App.LEXIS642(Tenn.Crim.App.,Jackson,Aug.16,2001),perm.toappeal .,~'- denied(Tenn.2001). -d(.  X -J)/ _ XOnAugust29,2001,thepetitionerfiledanunsignedpetitionforpostconvictionrelief.  OnSeptember3,2001,counselwasappointedandanamendedpetitionwassubsequentlyfiled.  Thatpetitionwassummarilydeniedbasedonaviolationofthestatuteoflimitations.The | petitionerfiledasecondpetitionforpostconvictionreliefinNovember2002.Thecourt b appointedcounselonthatpetitiononNovember21,2002,andanamendedpetitionwasfiledon H April24,2003.Inherpostconvictionpetition,thepetitionermadeseveralclaimsofineffective . ~ assistanceofcounselandassertedthatherguiltypleawasnotmadeknowinglyandvoluntarily.  d ThepostconvictioncourtheldanevidentiaryhearingonOctober8,2003,andthereafterdenied  J thepetition.Wehavereviewedtherecord,thebriefsoftheparties,andtheapplicablelaw.We  0 affirmthetrialcourtsdismissalofthepetition.     X XThefactssupportingthepetitionersconvictionweresummarizedinthisCourtsdirect   appealopinion.See_id._ԀOnThursday,April15,1999,atapproximatelyfouroclockinthe x  morning,thepetitionerwenttotheapartmentofthevictim,CarnomasManning,askingfor ^  moneythatthepetitionermaintainedthevictimowedtoher.Id.at*2.Afterthevictimstated D  thatshedidnothavethemoney,thepetitionerproceededtoaskifshecouldcomeinsidethe *z  victimsapartmentforaglassofwater,whichthevictimallowed.Id.Inthehoursfollowing, ` _thepetitionerinflictedaseriesofattacksonthevictim,includingintermittentlystabbingher F withbothabrokenbeerbottleandabutcherknife, hogtyingherhandsandfeet,puttinga , cigaretteoutonherface,andchoppingintoherforearmwithameatcleaver.Id.at*24.These  attackstookplacewhilethevictimstwochildren,agestwoandthree,wereintheapartment.Id.  at*4.Moreover,thevictimwassevenmonthspregnantwithherthirdchildatthetimeofthe  assault.Id.at*2. t  X XAtapproximately10:50a.m.,whilethepetitionerslept,thevictimescapedtheapartment @ andfledtotheapartmentmanagersoffice.Id.at*5.Thepropertymanagerthencalledseveral &v maintenancemenwhowenttotheapartmentanddetainedthepetitioneruntilthepolicearrived.  \ Id.at*6.OnApril16,1999,thepetitionergaveatypedandsignedstatementofadmissionto B theincident.Id. (  X XAtthepostconvictionhearing,thepetitionertestifiedthattrialcounselfailedto  adequatelymeetwithherandcommunicatetheissuespertainingtohercase.Specifically,the   petitionerstatedthattrialcounselonlymetwithheronceinjailand,thereafter,onlyspokewith p!  herbrieflyincourt.Shefurtherstatedthatcounselfailedtoexplainthesentencingprocedures V"! andterminologyanddidnotmakearecommendationtoherastowhethersheshouldacceptthe <#" prosecutorsoffer,pleatothecourt,orhaveajurytrial. "$r#  X XThepetitioneralsotestifiedthattrialcounselfailedtoinvestigatehermentalhealth %>!% backgroundandthewaysuchissuesmighthaveaffectedhercase.Thepetitionerhadbeen &$"& hospitalizedasateenageratSt.JosephsandOakviewforsuicideattempts.Shetestified_that ' #' shedidnotrecalltrialcounseleverinquiringintohermentalhistory,althoughshefeltthis (#( informationcouldhaveimpactedherdefense. )$)  X XFinally,thepetitionerarguesthatherguiltypleawasnotknowingandvoluntarybecause R+&+ shedidnotunderstandtheconsequencesoftheproceedingandbecauseshewascoercedbytrial 8,', counseltomaketheplea.Sheaversthatcounseldidnotinformheroftheramificationsofher  actionsandhowthoseactionswouldimpacthersentence.Moreover,thepetitionertestifiedthat  shebasedherdecisiontoplea,inlargepart,oncounselsstatementthathewould trytogether | fifteenyears,andthatshereliedonthisstatementtoherdetriment. b  H  X X  d&  Trialcounseltestifiedatthepostconvictionhearingthat,priortotrial,hemetwiththe . ~ petitionerseveraltimes,eachtimereviewingthefactsofthecase,thepetitionersstatement,and  d theprosecutionspleaoffer.Hestatedthatthepetitionerwasresistanttotheprosecutionsoffer  J offortyfouryearsandrepeatedlyaskedhimtonegotiateabetteroffer.Counselfurthertestified  0 that,despiteseveralattempts,hewasunabletogetanofferthepetitionerfoundacceptable;    moreover,sherefusedtogototrial.Hestatedthatheexplainedtothepetitionerthat,ifshedid    notwanttogototrialortaketheprosecutionsoffer,theonlyotheroptionwastopleadtothe   court,whichsheeventuallydid.Accordingtotrialcounselstestimony,thepleaandits x  consequenceswerefullyexplainedtothepetitionerinmultiplemeetings.Hestatedthatshe ^  cametotheconclusionthatshewouldpleadguiltyonherown,byvirtueofeliminatingallother D  options.d&&݌ *z  Ќ X  XCounselalsotestifiedconcerningtheissueofthepetitionersmentalhealthbackground. F Hestatedthathespokewithherabouthermentalconditionandthatsheunderstoodeverything , thathadhappenedtothatpointandcouldrecallherpriorrecord.Counselstatedthatitwashis  understandingthatacompetencyhearinghadalreadybeenconductedonapriorconvictionand  thatshewasdeclaredcompetentatthattime.Moreover,hestatedthatshetoldhimshehadnot  beenhospitalizedsinceshewas veryyoung.Therefore,hefoundnogoodfaithbasisfor t askingforamentalexaminationandthusdidnotpursuetheavenueofmentalincompetencein Z herdefense. @  &v  X X  S/  Thepostco_nviction_Ԁcourtdismissedthepetitionattheconclusionofthehearing.The  \ courtgavecredencetotrialcounselstestimony,findingthathehadbeendiligentbothinhis B effortstopreparethecaseandingettingthebestpleaofferavailableforthepetitioner. ( Moreover,thecourtfoundthattrialcounselmetwiththepetitionerandexplainedtoherall  availableoptions,aswellastheconsequencesofeach.Astotheinquiryintomental  incompetence,thecourtfoundthathermentalhealthhistorymighthaveimpactedadefenseof   diminishedcapacitybut,becauseshemadeitclearshedidnotwanttogototrial,theissue p!  wouldhaveneverbeenheardandwasthusirrelevant.Finally,astotheplea,thecourtfoundthat V"! theevidenceindicatedthattrialcounselexplainedfullythenatureandramificationsoftheplea, <#" thusitwasvoluntaryandknowing.Moreover,herexperiencewiththejusticesystemweighedin "$r# favorofaknowingandvoluntaryplea;withseventeenpriorarrestsandeightconvictions,the %X $ courtfoundthatshewas notanovicetothejusticesystem,andthatsheunderstoodherrights %>!% frompriorexperience.Thus,thecourtdismissedthepetition,andthepetitionerfiledatimely &$"& appealtothisCourt.S//݌ ' #' Ќ X    X  56  56p6݌ )$) Ќ X  X3XXX3      & `   7  Analysis 77 m\7Ԍ  Ќ   X3XXX3  XInitially,wenotethatthejudgmentofthepostconvictioncourtisinconflictwiththe | transcriptoftheproceedings.Althoughthejudgmentstatesthatthepetitionwasdeniedbased b ontheexpirationofthepostconvictionstatuteoflimitations,thiswasnotevendiscussedinthe H transcriptandamountstoamisapplicationoflaw.TheStateconcedesthatthepetitionerwasnot . ~ timebarredbutasksthisCourttorelyonthespecificfindingsoffactandconclusionsoflaw  d madeimmediatelyafterthepostconvictionhearingandnotedinthetranscript.Asageneral  J rule, whenthereisaconflictbetweenthejudgmentofconvictionandthetranscriptofthe  0 proceedings,thetranscriptcontrols.RonaldW.Ricev.DavidMills,        No.E200300328CCA    R3PC,2003Tenn.Crim.App.LEXIS709,at*8(Tenn.Crim.App.,Knoxville,Aug.19,    2003)(citingStatev.Davis,706S.W.2d96,97(Tenn.Crim.App.1985)).Asaresult,wehave   indeedreliedonthereasoningfoundinthetranscript,andouropinionreflectsthatreliance.The x  errantjudgmentisamereclericalerrorwhichmayberemediedbythepostconvictioncourt ^  pursuanttoTennesseeRuleofCriminalProcedure36. D  '`7 *z  Thepetitionerfirstcontendsthatshereceivedineffectiveassistanceofcounsel.Whena ` claimofineffectiveassistanceofcounselismadeundertheSixthAmendment,thepetitioner F bearstheburdenofproving(1)thatcounselXN XXX3=X3X XXNsperformancewasdeficient,and(2)thedeficiency , wasprejudicialintermsofrenderingareasonableprobabilitythattheresultofthetrialwas  unreliableortheproceedingswerefundamentallyunfair.Stricklandv.Washington,466U.S.  668,687,104S.Ct.2052,2064,80L.Ed.2d674(1984).Thisstandardhasalsobeenappliedto  therighttocounselunderArticleI,Section9oftheTennesseeConstitution.Statev.Melson, v 772S.W.2d417,419n.2(Tenn.1989).Whenapetitionerclaimsineffectiveassistanceof \ counselinrelationtoaguiltyplea,thepetitionermustprovethatcounselperformeddeficiently B and,butforcounselXN XXX3=X3X XXNserrors,thepetitionerwouldnothavepledguiltybutwouldhave,instead, (x insistedupongoingtotrial.Hillv.Lockhart,474U.S.52,59,106S.Ct.366,370,88L.Ed.2d ` 203(1985). F  X XInBaxterv.Rose,523S.W.2d930,936(Tenn.1975),oursupremecourtrequiredthat  theservicesberenderedwithintherangeofcompetencedemandedofattorneysincriminal  cases.InreviewingcounselXN XXX3=X3X XXNsconduct,aXN XXX3AX3X XXNfairassessmentofattorneyperformancerequiresthat   everyeffortbemadetoeliminatethedistortingeffectsofhindsight,toreconstructthe v!  circumstancesofcounselXN XXX3=X3X XXNschallengedconduct,andtoevaluatetheconductfromcounsels \"! perspectiveatthetime.Strickland,466U.S.at689,104S.Ct.at2065;seeNicholsv.State,90 D#" S.W.3d576,587(Tenn.2002). *$z#  X XThepetitionerbearstheburdenofprovingbyclearandconvincingevidencethefactual %F!% allegationsthatwouldentitlethepetitionertorelief.Tenn.CodeAnn.XN XXX3'X3X XXNԀ40-30-110(f)(2003). &,"& ThisCourtisboundbythepostconvictioncourtXN XXX3=X3X XXNsfindingsoffactunlesstheevidence '#' preponderatesagainstthosefindings.Fieldsv.State,40S.W.3d450,45657(Tenn.2001). (#(  X XThepetitionercontendsthatcounselwasineffectivebecauseofhisfailuretovisitthe x*%* petitioner,failuretocommunicateissuestothepetitioner,andfailuretoinvestigatethefactsof ^+&+ thecase,particularlythementalhealthofthepetitioner.Thepostconvictioncourtaccreditedthe D,',       _trialcounselstestimonythathevisitedwithher severaltimes,eachtimegoingoverthe  variousissuesofthecaseandinformingthepetitionerofpertinentinformation.Insodoing,the  courtfoundthattrialcounselwasnotineffective inhisassistancetoher,innegotiatingthecase, | ortalkingtoheraboutthecase.... b  H Moreover,astotheinquiryintothementalhealthbackgroundofthepetitioner,thepost . ~ convictioncourtfoundthattrialcounselsfailuretolookintothementalhealthofthepetitioner  d wasnotineffectiveassistance.Insupportofthisfinding,thecourtnotedtherational  J conversationsthattrialcounselhadwiththepetitioner,aswellasthefactthatthepetitioner  0 refusedajurytrial,thusmakingtheissueofmentalincompetencemoot.Theevidencepresented    doesnotpreponderateagainstthefindingsoffactbythepostconvictioncourt.Thepetitioner    hasfailedtoshowbyclearandconvincingevidencethatshewasprejudicedbyanyalleged   ineffectiveassistanceofcounsel. x   X XInadditiontoineffectiveassistanceofcounsel,thepetitionerclaimsthatherguiltyplea D  wasunknowingandinvoluntary.Apostconvictionpetitionermaysuccessfullyattackher *z  convictionwhenherguiltypleawasunknowingorinvoluntary.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.XN XXX3'X3X XXNԀ4030 ` 103(2003);Boykinv.Alabama,395U.S.238,243,89S.Ct.1709,1712,23L.Ed.2d274 H (1969);Statev.Wilson,31S.W.3d189,194(Tenn.2002).Apleaisnot voluntaryifitresults . fromignorance,misunderstanding,coercion,inducements,orthreats.Blankenshipv.State,858  S.W.2d897,904(Tenn.1993).Thetrialcourtmustdetermineiftheguiltypleais knowingby  questioningthedefendanttomakesureheorshefullyunderstandsthepleaand_its  consequences.Statev.Pettus,986S.W.2d540,542(Tenn.1999);Blankenship,858S.W.2dat v 904.Becausethepleamustrepresentavoluntaryandintelligentchoiceamongalternatives \ availabletothedefendant,thetrialcourtmaylookatanumberofcircumstantialfactorsin B makingthisdetermination.Blankenship,858S.W.2dat904.Thesefactorsinclude:(1)the (x defendantXN XXX3=X3X XXNsrelativeintelligence;(2)thedefendantsfamiliaritywithcriminalproceedings;(3) ^ whetherthedefendantwasrepresentedbycompetentcounselandhadtheopportunitytoconfer F withcounselaboutalternatives;(4)theadviceofcounselandthecourtaboutthechargesagainst , thedefendantandthepenaltytobeimposed;and(5)thedefendantXN XXX3=X3X XXNsreasonsforpleadingguilty,  includingthedesiretoavoidagreaterpenaltyinajurytrial.Id.at90405.   X XThepetitionerallegesthat,becausecounseldidnotexplaintheconsequencesofher v!  guiltypleaorthesentencingterminology,herpleawasunknowing.However,thepost \"! convictioncourtcreditedthetestimonyoftrialcounselandfoundthattheconsequencesofthe B#" pleawereexplainedtothepetitioneronmultipleoccasions.Moreover,thepostconvictioncourt ($x# foundthatshedid,infact,understandthemeaningofthepertinentterminology,asevidencedby %^ $ hertestimonyasthepostconvictionhearing.Further,therecordreflectsthatthepetitionerwas %D!% thoroughlyquestionedduringtheentryofherguiltypleaandansweredinafashionthatleftno &*"& questionastoherknowingact.Therefore,theanswersgivenbythepetitionerintheentryofher '#' guiltypleaareincompatiblewithherpostconvictionclaim.Finally,thecourtnotedthe (#( petitionerspriorhistorywiththecourtsysteminmaking_its_Ԁfinding,statingspecifically, Sothe )$) Courtdoesntfindthatshewassomuchoutoftheunderstandingofwhathappensdownhere r*%* andthesystemandpeopleexplainingherrights.Shesbeenexplainedherrightsanumberof X+&+ timesinthepast.Afterreviewingthetranscriptofthepleasubmissionhearingandevidence >,',     presentedatthepostconvictionreliefhearing,weconcludethattheevidencedoesnot  preponderateagainstthepostconvictioncourtXN XXX3=X3X XXNsfindingthatthepetitionerwasinformedofthe  consequencesofherguiltyplea.Thepetitionerhasfailedtoprovebyclearandconvincing ~ evidencethatherguiltypleaswerenotknowing. d  X XThereislikewisenoproofcontainedintherecordthatcounselcoercedthepetitioner.As 0  statedabove,thepostconvictioncourtfoundthattrialcounselfullyexplainedtheconsequences  f ofpleadingguiltyandtherightsthatwerebeingwaivedbythepetitioner.Moreover,thecourt  L adoptedtrialcounselsversionofthefacts,maintainingthattrialcounselpresentedthepetitioner  2 withtheoptions,butthefinaldecisionrestedwiththepetitioner.Thepostconvictioncourt    statedinitsfindingthat, Shedecidedtogowiththecourt.Thepetitionerhasfailedto    demonstratethatshedidnotknowinglyandvoluntarilyenterherpleaofguilty.    X  Conclusion `   X  Weconcludethatthepetitionerhasfailedtoshowthatshewasdeniedtheeffective ,|  assistanceofcounsel.WealsoconcludethatthepetitionerXN XXX3=X3X XXNsguiltypleawasknowingand b voluntary.Basedontheforegoingreasons,weaffirmthedenialofpostconvictionrelief; J however,weremandthismatter,pursuanttoTennesseeRuleofCriminalProcedure36,tothe 0 ShelbyCountyCriminalCourtforthelimitedpurposeofentryofacorrectedjudgment,  reflectingthereasoningfoundinthetranscriptoftheproceedings.     x  ^  D  *z  hX__________________________________ ` ЀJOHNEVERETTWILLIAMS,JUDGE