ÿWPCÛ$ µ ­yßs‹‚tЂvÐþÝè‡0e«ì µ<(`5Ï»b ŠyÊszN®%¡±ï3Éþ s”yƒè¡ðjCÁK'W ~î_=fÜréØäóc¤ý\ÓC¡ Q|…`Oè¹ã©M›¹¾¹ƒšÐ¥W‚ nó òd>ê4Þ<É;Z˜µßH£šûÄ1ÇæÄàHË¿D˜âþG¿÷·–AWO+£ï…\¢¡„úP’÷ê»14ÃE’½¸|yâ»õC^ò±Ïe¦#j)k©sAW©€‘<ÏŽ|]Ô’½Ø"25M4õ›}%ýüPØ.E3¬gSŸóL³øžÆàM‡jö†åæï1›­rLÎÛ×lê,§j½JÚ<à3Ù®£y5 JôÚ¾Ï7GЯý®‚™ìí±}²¿<9^µ·rÑ©-*®´w¹˜mÆÎUÁíIöM·V8n:Éyüú´À&R¨AĦ²ÁA g îÌZÑ^Úè ®V¡z GçM6§ÎOúhŸ;¢=È"ˆÚù*^0:Ín‹ÿ`†Çú?x`û6nqªÀnïÓkÚŸŸìÁáƒäþLP‹×Ú]Û=mm¿É“äøõÒ4ñþ͉€™‰{92äœQÞ“‚¼Nb#É\ %% 72+ 0ˆ] UNå 0c3 ~– z ÒŽ ~` NÞ 1uà fUÆ»ÆÆGÆ ~ÓNQfS¹EÏ 0DÑÑ4^ IwU4Ym| m~‰•²bÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ 0ëØØØØ Bà à 0¤à D3„! D-·! 0Kä!ä! AS/"Æ‚" 0¤H# 0Dì# A«0$˜HP LaserJet 4000 Series PCL6ÒV,,,,ÒV0» i)(`£ª$¡¡Ñ€.ÑÑ8€½­»»d»»d8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  Ó(í€"  Z6Times New Roman Regular(;3£$´´Ô2#ÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0  à tÑ ` ÑÑ ` ÑÑ\R3Ø'Letter\Ñ ˜C:\PROGRA~1\COREL\WORDPE~1\TEMPLATE\CUSTOM~1\REVISE~1.WPTC:\Program Files\Corel\WordPerfect Office 2000\Template\Custom WP Templates\revised standard opinion.wpt tÑ ` ÑÑ\R3Ø'Letter\ÑÑ ° Ñ3#37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a) \Ñ\R3Ø'Letter\ÑLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5‚Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5„Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5…Level 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5 tÑ ° ÑÑ ° ÑÑ\R3Ø'Letter\Ñ \Ñ\R3Ø'Letter\Ñ Ý ƒR.$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôª4ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÔ‡XÂ_Xòôª4ÔÔ#†ôª4òXXÂ_~#ÔA€1995€psychological€evaluation€report€contained€in€the€record€reveals€that€the€petitionerððs€full€scaleÐ ° Ðintelligence€quotient€(IQ)€score€is€65,€placing€him€in€a€classification€of€mild€mental€retardation.€The€evaluator€found,Ð qÁ Ðhowever,€€that€the€petitioner€ð ðoften€steals€from€others,€.€.€.€prefers€to€be€around€others€who€get€into€trouble,ðð€has€noÐ 2‚ Ðremorse€for€wrongful€or€illegal€behavior,€is€ð ðhighly€Ô_ÔoppositionalÔ_Ô€€and€.€.€.€likely€to€be€openly€defiant€toward€authority,ððÐ óC Ðand€has€a€ð ðhigh€level€of€homicidal€ideation€and€violation€of€the€rights€of€others.ðð€€The€evaluator€determined€that€theÐ ´ Ðpetitioner,€at€age€twelve€years€and€eleven€months,€ð ðlikely€presents€a€threat€to€the€community.ðð€(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó TiptonMarneyTalleyT[ennesseeC[odeA[annotateds]ection CJC CrimStricklandIrickt]hisProfittWaldronLockhartBankston a]nColyerA[nnotatedBoykinWallenMomon a]s T]heD]enialoppositionalCURWOOD WITTKimmelman7²Œ/Ï lk.ê:i¢×+003|xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ Ý ƒR.$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôª4ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔWe€are€aware€that€the€record€contains€no€psychological€report€on€the€petitioner€more€recent€than€the€1995Ð ° Ðreport€that€was€a€part€of€his€juvenile€history;€however,€our€task€in€this€post„conviction€proceeding€is€to€determine€whetherÐ qÁ Ðthe€evidence€preponderates€against€the€post„conviction€courtððs€finding€that€the€petitioner€failed€to€carry€his€burden€ofÐ 2‚ Ðproving€his€claims€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence.€òò€Seeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€40„30„110(f)€(2003).€€€In€other€words,€heÐ óC Ðfailed€to€introduce€evidence€òòat€the€post„conviction€evidentiary€hearingóó€to€show€that€his€psychological,€mental,€orÐ ´ Ðrehabilitative€status€was€different€in€1999€than€it€was€in€1995.€€ ¨Ý ƒR.$ÝÓ  Óà  àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôª4ò»»ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔAfter€reviewing€the€history€of€both€the€federal€and€state€constitutional€guarantees€of€the€right€to€testify,€theÐ ° ÐòòMomonóó€court€stated,€ð ð[T]he€right€of€a€criminal€defendant€to€testify€in€his€or€her€own€behalf€is€a€fundamentalÐ qÁ Ðconstitutional€right.ðð€€òòId.óó€at€161.€€Then,€the€court€added,€ð ðSince€the€right€to€testify€òòat€one's€own€trialóó€is€a€fundamentalÐ 2‚ Ðright,€it€follows€that€the€right€may€only€be€waived€personally€by€the€defendant.ðð€€òòId.€óóat€161€(emphasis€added).- ù-(|G2.$¤¤Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€ŽY»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  ÚóóÔ€ôª4ò»»Ô d(|3¿$££Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€ŽY»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝVVVV'ÿÿdxd)!ÈÈÈÈdxdx( ±þ$’’ò òFigure€Ú  Ú1Ú  Úó ó^_X`YEþÿ<<CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(|3¿$¢¢Ý ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€ŽY»»dd8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  Ý($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó óX[Z&OLE 2.0 Box <=8ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿCÿÿ HKKKKÝ ƒ£ª!ÝÑ€.ÑÑ8€ŽY»»ddÈ8ÑÑ ý ÑÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼ŽY»»»ÔÑ8€Â_XXdé»»d8ÑÑ  Ñà@hhìàÔ‡îm.ŽYÔIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEˆÐ ° Ðà@gg$ìàAT€NASHVILLEÔ#†¼ŽY»îîm. #ԈРÓ# ÐÓ  ÓAssigned€on€Briefs€June€3,€2003,€at€JacksonÐ öF ÐÔ‡XÂ_X»¼ŽYÔÌò òÔ#†¼ŽY»XXÂ_#ÔANDREW€LEVI€JEFFERSONòòóó€v.€STATE€OF€TENNESSEEòòóóÔ‡XÂ_X»¼ŽYÔó óÐ ï? ÐÌà@@½½ìàò òAppeal€from€the€Criminal€Court€for€Davidson€CountyÐ é 9 Ðà@@øøìàNo.€2000„A„253€€€€€€Steve€Dozier,€JudgeÐ Ó # ÐÌÌà@@ìì*ìàßA€V) °°` d€÷E<` AßÐ ‘á  ÐÌà@@TTìàNo.€M2002„01604„CCA„R3„PC€„€Filed€December€Ô_Ô12,2003Ô_ÔÐ ŠÚ  ÐÌßA€V) °°` dE<]` AßÐ ^®  Ðó óÌÓ  ÓThe€petitioner,€Andrew€Levi€Jefferson,€appeals€from€the€Davidson€County€Criminal€Courtððs€denialÐ V¦  Ðof€post„conviction€and€òòhabeas€corpusóó€relief.€€In€his€amended,€combined€petitions€for€relief,€theÐ ? Ðpetitioner€challenges€his€2001,€guilty„pleaded€convictions€of€second€degree€murder€and€attempt€toÐ (x Ðcommit€especially€aggravated€robbery.€€On€appeal,€the€petitioner€claims€post„conviction€reliefÐ a Ðbecause€his€trial€counsel€were€ineffective€in€failing€to€defeat€the€transfer€of€the€petitionerððs€case€fromÐ úJ Ðjuvenile€court€to€criminal€court,€in€preventing€the€petitioner€from€testifying€at€the€transfer€hearing,Ð ã3 Ðby€failing€to€investigate€and€discover€the€petitionerððs€mental€status,€and€in€failing€to€present€a€criticalÐ Ì Ðissue€in€pretrial€motions.€€Also,€the€petitioner€claims€that€his€guilty€pleas€were€involuntary€andÐ µ Ðunknowing€and€that€he€was€denied€due€process€because€he€was€not€allowed€to€testify€in€the€juvenileÐ žî Ðcourt€transfer€hearing.€€In€his€joined€claim€for€òòhabeas€corpus€óórelief,€the€petitioner€claims€that,Ð ‡× Ðbecause€of€errors€in€the€transfer€from€juvenile€court,€the€criminal€court€lacked€jurisdiction€toÐ pÀ Ðadjudicate€his€case.€€Based€upon€our€review,€we€find€no€reversible€error€and€affirm€the€actions€ofÐ Y© Ðthe€post„conviction€court.Ð B’ ÐÔ#†¼ŽY»XXÂ_Ž#ÔÔ‡XÂ_X»¼ŽYÔÓ¯ÓÌò òTenn.€R.€App.€P.€3;€Judgment€of€the€Criminal€Court€is€Affirmed.ó óÐ d ÐÌòòÓ  ÓÔ#†¼ŽY»àXÂ_À #ÔÔ‡XÂ_X.¼ŽYÔJames€Curwood€Witt,€Jr.,€óóJ.,€delivered€the€opinion€of€the€court,€in€which€òòJoseph€M.€Tiptonóó€andÐ ç 7  ÐòòDavid€G.€Hayes,€JJ.óó,€joined.Ð Ð! ! ÐÌDwight€E.€Scott,€Nashville,€Tennessee,€for€the€Appellant,€Andrew€Levi€Jefferson.Ð ¢#ò# ÐÌPaul€G.€Summers,€Attorney€General€&€Reporter;€Elizabeth€B.€Marney,€Assistant€Attorney€General;Ð t%Ä % ÐVictor€S.€Johnson,€III,€District€Attorney€General;€and€James€H.€Todd,€Assistant€District€AttorneyÐ ]&­!& ÐGeneral,€for€the€Appellee,€State€of€Tennessee.Ð F'–"' ÐÓN ÓÌÌÌÌÌÌò òOPINIONó óÔ#†¼ŽY»XXÂ_} #ÔÔ‡XÂ_X»¼ŽYÔÐ ¥-õ(.ý ÐÔ_Ô‡òòóóÔ#†¼ŽY»XXÂ_(#ÔÓ  ÓÔ€XÂ_X»¼ŽYÔÑ€ ²ÏÑÑ€²ÏÑÑ€d ÑÑ€ š- ÑÑ€© Ñà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  à€€€€€€òòI.€€Conviction€Proceedings.óóÐ ° ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€underlying€offenses€relate€to€the€shooting€death€of€Julius€Talley.€€€The€petitioner,Ð ‚Ò Ðborn€August€8,€1981,€was€seventeen€years€of€age€on€January€19,€1999,€when€the€underlying€offensesÐ k» Ðwere€committed,€and€on€June€10,€1999,€when€the€juvenile€court€transferred€his€case€to€criminalÐ T¤ Ðcourt.€€After€the€transfer,€the€petitioner€was€indicted€on€one€count€of€first€degree€felony€murder,€òòseeóóÐ =  ÐTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„202(a)(2)€(2003)€(proscribing€first€degree€felony€murder),€€and€one€countÐ & v Ðof€attempt€to€commit€especially€aggravated€robbery,€òòid.óó€ðððð€39„13„403€(proscribing€especiallyÐ  _ Ðaggravated€robbery€as€a€Class€A€offense),€„12„101€(attempt),€„12„107€(grading€criminal€attempt€ð ðoneÐ ø H Ð(1)€classification€lower€than€the€most€serious€crime€attemptedðð)€(2003).€€€He€was€nineteen€years€ofÐ á 1  Ðage€on€January€17,€2001,€when€he€entered€guilty€pleas€in€criminal€court€to€second€degree€murderÐ Ê   Ðand€attempt€to€commit€especially€aggravated€robbery.€€Pursuant€to€the€plea€agreement,€he€wasÐ ³  Ðsentenced€as€a€Range€I€offender€to€the€minimum€Class€A€sentence€of€fifteen€years€for€second€degreeÐ œì  Ðmurder€and€to€the€maximum€Class€B€sentence€of€twelve€years€for€attempt€to€commit€especiallyÐ …Õ  Ðaggravated€robbery.€€òòSee€id.óó€ðð€40„35„112(a)(1),€(2)€(2003)€(delineating€sentencing€ranges).€€TheseÐ n¾  ÐDepartment€of€Correction€sentences€were€imposed€to€run€concurrently.Ð W§  ÐÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  à€€€€€€a.€€Transfer€Proceeding.Ð )y ÐÌà  àà ` àOn€June€10,€1999,€the€Davidson€County€Juvenile€Court€conducted€a€hearing€pursuantÐ ûK Ðto€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€37„1„134(a)€and€to€determine€whether€the€ð ðdisposition€of€theÐ ä4 Ð[petitioner]€shall€be€as€if€[he]€were€an€adult.ðð€€òòId.óó€ðð€37„1„134(a)€(2001).€€After€presenting€extensiveÐ Í Ðevidence€about€the€petitionerððs€involvement€in€the€homicide€and€attempted€robbery,€the€prosecutorÐ ¶ Ðpresented€the€petitionerððs€juvenile€court€file€and€asked€the€court€to€consider€it€as€evidence.€€TheÐ Ÿï Ðjuvenile€court€judge€took€ð ða€few€minutes€to€go€through€the€files€.€.€.€to€see€.€.€.€the€prior€record€andÐ ˆØ Ð.€.€.€prior€treatment€efforts€and€the€things€that€the€code€instructs€me€to€look€at.ðð€€€After€a€recess,€theÐ qÁ Ðjudge€reconvened€the€hearing,€set€bond,€and€concluded€the€hearing.€€The€juvenile€court€then€enteredÐ Zª Ðan€order€transferring€the€petitionerððs€case€to€criminal€court.€€In€the€order,€the€court€recounted€itsÐ C“ Ðreview€of€the€transfer€considerations€mandated€by€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€37„1„134(b).€Ð ,| ÐThe€court€found€that€the€petitioner€was€seventeen€years€old€when€the€offenses€were€committed,€thatÐ e Ðhe€was€not€committable€to€an€institution€for€the€mentally€ill€or€retarded,€that€he€committed€theÐ þN Ðcharged€offenses,€and€that,€upon€examination€of€ð ðthe€prior€record€of€the€[petitioner]€and€the€priorÐ ç 7 Ðtreatment€received€by€the€[petitioner],ðð€the€state€ð ðhas€met€its€burden€under€T[ennessee]€C[ode]Ð Ð!   ÐA[annotated]€[s]ection€37„1„134€regarding€the€appropriateness€of€transfer.ðð€€Ð ¹" ! ÐÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  à€€€€€€€€b.€€Suppression€Proceeding.Ð ‹$Û# ÐÌà  àà ` àFollowing€the€transfer€to,€and€the€indictment€in,€criminal€court,€the€petitionerððsÐ ]&­!% Ðcounsel€moved€to€suppress€the€petitionerððs€January€21€and€25,€1999€statements€on€the€grounds€thatÐ F'–"& Ðthey€were€obtained€in€violation€of€his€rights€pursuant€to€the€Fifth,€Sixth,€and€FourteenthÐ /(#' ÐAmendments€to€the€United€States€Constitution€and€Articles€1,€7,€and€8€of€the€TennesseeÐ )h$( ÐConstitution.€€The€motion€alleged€that€the€petitionerððs€statements€to€police€officers€on€both€days,€andÐ *Q%) Ðto€an€assistant€district€attorney€general€on€January€25,€1999,€were€€rendered€in€violation€of€theÐ ê*:&* Ðprinciples€of€òòMiranda€v.€Arizonaóó,€384€U.S.€436,€86€S.€Ct.€1602€(1966).€€From€evidence€presentedÐ Ó+#'+ Ðat€the€suppression€hearing,€the€trial€court€made€the€following€findings€of€fact.€€Acting€uponÐ ° Ðinformation€supplied€by€an€accomplice€to€the€shooting€of€Mr.€Talley,€officers€visited€the€petitionerððsÐ ™é Ðhome€on€January€21,€1999.€€The€petitioner€ð ðagreed€to€accompany€[the€officers]€downtown€to€answerÐ ‚Ò Ðsome€questions.ðð€€At€the€Criminal€Justice€Center€(CJC),€the€petitioner€made€statements€implicatingÐ k» Ðhimself€and€ð ðaccompanied€[an€officer]€to€a€location€to€obtain€the€alleged€murder€weapon.ðð€Ð T¤ ÐThereafter,€the€officer€took€the€petitioner€home.€€After€acquiring€new€information€about€the€crime,Ð =  Ðthe€officer€called€the€petitioner€on€January€25€and€asked€him€ð ðif€he€would€come€in€for€moreÐ & v Ðquestions.ðð€€The€officer€ð ðpicked€up€the€[petitioner]€and€proceeded€downtown€to€the€[CJC].ðð€€TheÐ  _ Ðofficer€testified€that€after€arriving€at€the€CJC,€he€read€the€petitioner€his€òòMirandaóó€rights€and€that€theÐ ø H Ðpetitioner€waived€the€rights€and€gave€a€tape„recorded€statement.€€The€officer€then€arrested€theÐ á 1  Ðpetitioner€and€took€him€to€the€Juvenile€Detention€Center,€where€after€the€òòMirandaóó€rights€were€againÐ Ê   Ðexplained€and€waived,€an€assistant€district€attorney€general€interviewed€him.€Ð ³  ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€its€order€denying€suppression,€the€criminal€court€found€that,€despite€the€petitionerÐ …Õ  Ðhaving€been€placed€in€handcuffs€while€being€transported€to€the€CJC€on€January€21,€the€petitionerÐ n¾  Ðwas€under€no€restraint€while€being€questioned€and,€accordingly,€was€not€in€custody€whenÐ W§  Ðinterrogated€on€January€21,€1999.€€Based€on€that€finding,€the€court€then€denied€suppression€of€theÐ @ ÐJanuary€21€inculpative€statement.€Ð )y ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€court€then€turned€to€consider€whether€the€petitioner€effectively€waived€hisÐ ûK ÐòòMirandaóó€rights€before€giving€the€inculpative€statements€on€January€25.€€The€court€considered€theÐ ä4 Ðpetitionerððs€background€and€his€ability€to€read€and€write,€accredited€the€testimony€of€the€policeÐ Í Ðofficer€who€described€the€petitionerððs€demeanor€during€the€waiver€process,€and€found€that€theÐ ¶ Ðpetitioner€ð ðvoluntarily€waived€his€òòMirandaóó€rights€in€both€statements€given€on€January€25,€1999.ððÐ Ÿï ÐÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  à€€€€€c.€€Guilty€Plea€Proceeding.Ð qÁ ÐÌà  àà ` àOn€January€17,€2001,€the€petitioner€entered€into€a€plea€agreement€which€called€forÐ C“ Ða€reduction€of€the€felony€murder€charge€to€second€degree€murder€with€a€minimum€Range€I,€ClassÐ ,| ÐA€sentence€of€fifteen€years€in€the€Department€of€Correction.€€Also,€the€petitioner€agreed€to€pleadÐ e Ðguilty€to€attempt€to€commit€especially€aggravated€robbery€and€to€serve€a€maximum€Range€I,€ClassÐ þN ÐB€sentence€of€twelve€years€concurrently€with€the€second€degree€murder€sentence.€€On€January€18,Ð ç 7 Ð2001,€the€trial€court€engaged€the€petitioner€in€a€thorough€inquiry€about€his€desire€to€plead€guilty€andÐ Ð!   Ðhis€waiver€of€various€procedural€rights.€€The€petitioner€acknowledged€that€his€attorneys€hadÐ ¹" ! Ðdiscussed€the€case€with€him€and€that€he€had€neither€lingering€questions€nor€complaints€aboutÐ ¢#ò" Ðcounselððs€service.€€The€trial€judge€explained€the€terms€of€the€plea,€including€the€statutory€provisionÐ ‹$Û# Ðthat€the€second€degree€murder€sentence€would€be€served€at€100€percent,€and€the€petitionerÐ t%Ä $ Ðacknowledged€that€he€understood€the€terms.€€The€judge€explained€the€petitionerððs€rights€to€be€triedÐ ]&­!% Ðby€a€jury,€to€be€represented€by€counsel,€to€confront€adverse€witnesses,€to€compel€the€testimony€ofÐ F'–"& Ðwitnesses,€to€avoid€self„incrimination,€to€testify€in€his€own€behalf,€and€to€appeal€any€adverseÐ /(#' Ðadjudications.€€The€petitioner€acknowledged€that€he€understood€these€rights€and€that€he€wished€toÐ )h$( Ðwaive€them€in€exchange€for€the€plea€arrangement.€€The€petitioner€acknowledged€that€he€attained€theÐ *Q%) Ðâ âeighth€grade€in€school,€could€read€and€write,€and€that€he€understood€the€plea€documents.€€TheÐ ê*:&* ÐÑ ²ÏÑâ  âÑTRXì3Ø'LetterXà3Ø' Letter3Ø'Letter ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼ÿ3Ø'LetterTÑâ  âÑ  Ñprosecutor€stated€in€detail€the€factual€basis€for€the€pleas,€and€the€petitioner€confirmed€the€truth€ofÐ ° Ðthe€statement.€€The€petitioner€affirmed€that€he€was€pleading€guilty€freely€and€voluntarily.Ð ™é Ðâ âÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àòòII.€€Post„Conviction€Proceeding.óóÐ k» ÐÌà  àà ` àAt€the€post„conviction€evidentiary€hearing€held€on€May€10,€2002,€the€petitionerððs€trialÐ ; ‹ Ðattorneys€testified.€€The€petitionerððs€juvenile€court€counsel€characterized€the€transfer€proceeding€inÐ $ t Ðjuvenile€court€as€being€one€where€ð ðbasically,€the€issue€is€whether€the€juvenile€system€can€handle€theÐ  ] Ðchild€given€the€factors€of€the€child€and€the€childððs€background€history€versus€whether€a€child€needsÐ ö F Ðto€be€in€the€adult€system.ðð€€Counsel€reviewed€with€the€petitioner€his€juvenile€court€history.€€€In€1995,Ð ß /  Ðhe€had€been€transferred€to€criminal€court€on€another€homicide€charge€that€was€later€dismissed.€Ð È   ÐFollowing€that,€he€was€adjudicated€delinquent€in€juvenile€court€for€committing€aggravated€robberyÐ ±  Ðand€attempted€homicide,€and€he€was€committed€to€a€state€juvenile€institution.€€The€petitioner€wasÐ šê  Ðon€ð ðafter„careðð€from€that€institution€when€he€committed€the€instant€offenses.€€Counsel€testified€thatÐ ƒÓ  Ðthe€petitionerððs€prior€institutional€placement€was€the€ð ðmost€intensive€and€severeðð€form€ofÐ l¼  Ðrehabilitation€available€in€the€juvenile€justice€system.€€Counsel€admitted€that€she€saw€nothing€elseÐ U¥  Ðappropriate€and€available€to€the€petitioner€through€the€juvenile€system.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×ò ò€ó ó€Counsel€testified€that€evenÐ >Ž Ðafter€she€had€spent€25€to€30€hours€conferring€with€the€petitioner,€he€presented€no€signs€of€mental€orÐ *z Ðpsychological€impairment€and€that€he€merely€wanted€to€waive€any€objection€to€the€transfer€toÐ c Ðcriminal€court€in€exchange€for€a€lower€bond.€€Counsel€did€not€recall€whether€the€petitioner€requestedÐ üL Ðto€testify€at€the€transfer€hearing,€but€she€testified€that€she€normally€would€advise€against€a€juvenileððsÐ å5 Ðtestimony€in€such€a€situation.Ð Î ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€criminal€court,€counsel€moved€to€suppress€the€petitionerððs€three€pretrial€statements.€Ð  ð ÐShe€did€not€recall€discussing€with€the€petitioner€the€possibility€of€appealing€the€suppression€ruling,Ð ‰Ù Ðbut€notwithstanding,€she€believed€that€an€appeal€would€have€been€futile.€€She€admitted€that€in€theÐ r Ðsuppression€proceeding,€she€did€not€raise€the€issue€of€how€much€time€had€elapsed€with€the€petitionerÐ [« Ðin€custody€before€the€statements€were€given.€€Counsel€testified€that€the€state€had€evidence€other€thanÐ D” Ðthe€petitionerððs€statements€that€inculpated€him€in€the€instant€offenses.Ð -} ÐÌà  àà ` àCounsel€testified€that€she€read€the€plea€agreement€to€the€petitioner€and€€that€heÐ ÿO Ðseemed€to€understand,€although€counsel€was€then€unaware€of€the€petitionerððs€IQ€score.€€She€admittedÐ è 8 Ðthat€knowledge€of€the€IQ€score€might€have€affected€the€way€she€explained€things€to€the€petitioner.€Ð Ñ!!  ÐNevertheless,€counsel€discussed€possible€theories€of€defense€and€explained€the€theory€of€criminalÐ º" ! Ðresponsibility,€which€the€petitioner€apparently€understood.€€Counsel€sought€no€psychologicalÐ £#ó" Ðevaluation€because€the€petitioner€gave€no€indication€of€any€mental€health€issue.€€Ð Œ$Ü# Ðà  àà ` àÐ u%Å $ Ðà  àà ` àThe€petitioner€testified€at€the€evidentiary€hearing€that€he€asked€his€lawyer€whetherÐ ° Ðhe€could€testify€at€the€transfer€hearing;€however,€he€admitted€that€had€he€testified,€he€would€haveÐ ™é Ðrepeated€the€account€he€gave€in€his€pretrial€statements.€€He€testified€that€he€had€attended€specialÐ ‚Ò Ðeducation€classes€and€had€difficulty€reading.€€Ð k» ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€petitioner€testified€that€on€January€25,€1999,€he€stayed€at€the€CJC€about€six€orÐ =  Ðseven€hours€before€being€booked€into€the€juvenile€facility.€€He€acknowledged€that€counsel€visitedÐ & v Ðhim€seven€or€eight€times€before€the€plea€hearing€but€denied€that€he€understood€everything€she€toldÐ  _ Ðhim.€€He€testified€that€he€told€counsel€that€he€wanted€to€go€to€trial€but€that€she€overcame€his€will€toÐ ø H Ðdo€so€when€she€told€him€that€if€he€were€convicted€of€first€degree€murder,€he€would€receive€anÐ á 1  Ðautomatic€life€sentence.€€The€petitioner€testified€that€he€did€not€know€the€meaning€of€ð ðfacilitationððÐ Ê   Ðas€a€lesser„included€offense.€€He€denied€that€counsel€discussed€lesser„included€offenses€with€him.€Ð ³  ÐHe€claimed€that€he€thought€the€effective€fifteen„year€sentence€would€be€served€at€thirty€percent.€€Ð œì  ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€its€written€order€denying€post„conviction€relief,€the€trial€court€found€that€ð ðtheÐ n¾  Ðrecord€is€clear€that€the€juvenile€court€considered€the€entire€juvenile€file€on€the€petitioner€.€.€.€whenÐ W§  Ðconsidering€whether€to€transfer€these€cases.ðð€€The€post„conviction€court€found€that€the€juvenile€courtÐ @ Ðcomplied€with€the€law€when€it€transferred€the€petitionerððs€case€to€criminal€court€and,€moreover,€Ð )y Ðfound€that€the€petitioner€ð ðfailed€to€show€how€[his]€lack€of€testimony€[at€the€transfer€hearing]Ð b Ðrendered€the€outcome€of€the€transfer€hearing€unreliable.ðð€€The€court€ruled€that€the€petitioner€alsoÐ ûK Ðfailed€to€show€that€he€was€prejudiced€by€his€lack€of€testimony€at€the€transfer€hearing.€€The€post„Ð ä4 Ðconviction€court€found€that€trial€counsel€had€adequately€prepared€the€case€and€advised€the€petitioner,Ð Í Ðand€the€petitioner€failed€to€show€prejudice€in€support€of€his€claim€that€counsel€should€have€utilizedÐ ¶ Ða€statutory€basis€for€seeking€suppression€of€the€petitionerððs€pretrial€statements.€€€Also,€based€uponÐ Ÿï Ðits€rulings€that€the€transfer€to€criminal€court€was€proper,€the€post„conviction€court€held€that€theÐ ˆØ Ðcriminal€court€had€jurisdiction€over€the€petitioner€and€his€case;€it€thus€denied€òòhabeas€corpusóó€relief.€Ð qÁ ÐÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  à€€€€€€òòIII.€€Post„Conviction€Procedureóó.Ð C“ ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€post-conviction€petitioner€bears€the€burden€of€proving€his€or€her€allegations€byÐ e Ðclear€and€convincing€evidence.€Tenn.€Code€€Ann.€ðð€40-30-110(f)€(2003).€€On€appeal,€the€appellateÐ þN Ðcourt€accords€to€the€lower€courtððs€findings€of€fact€the€weight€of€a€jury€verdict,€and€these€findings€areÐ ç 7 Ðconclusive€on€appeal€unless€the€evidence€preponderates€against€them.€€òòHenley€v.€Stateóó,€960€S.W.2dÐ Ð!   Ð572,€578-79€(Tenn.€1997);€€òòBates€v.€Stateóó,€973€S.W.2d€615,€€631€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1997).€€€Ð ¹" ! ÐÌà  àà ` àà ¸ à€€€€€òòIV.€€Adjudication€of€the€Petitionerððs€Claims.óóÐ ‹$Û# ÐÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àa.€€Ineffective€Assistance€of€Counsel.Ð ]&­!% ÐÌà  àà ` àFirst,€we€address€the€petitionerððs€claims€that€his€convictions€were€the€product€ofÐ /(#' Ðineffective€assistance€of€counsel,€in€contravention€of€the€Sixth€Amendment€of€the€United€StatesÐ )h$( ÐConstitution€and€Article€I,€section€9€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution.€€òòSee€Baxter€v.€Roseóó,€523€S.W.2dÐ *Q%) Ð930€(Tenn.€1975).€€He€claims€that€counsel€was€ineffective€in€failing€(1)€to€press€the€juvenile€courtÐ ê*:&* Ðon€the€issues€whether€the€petitionerððs€prospects€for€rehabilitation€in€the€juvenile€system€and€his€mildÐ Ó+#'+ Ðmental€retardation€defeated€the€stateððs€effort€to€transfer€the€case€to€criminal€court,€(2)€to€present€theÐ ° Ðpetitioner€as€a€witness€in€the€transfer€hearing,€(3)€to€discover€and€exploit€the€petitionerððs€mild€mentalÐ ™é Ðretardation€as€a€means€of€defending€the€charges€in€criminal€court,€(4)€to€adequately€advise€theÐ ‚Ò Ðpetitioner€prior€to€entering€into€a€plea€agreement,€particularly€with€respect€to€the€possibility€ofÐ k» Ðfacilitation€as€lesser„included€offenses€of€the€charged€offenses,€and€(5)€to€raise€the€issue€of€lengthÐ T¤ Ðof€detention€in€the€motion€to€suppress.Ð =  Ѐ€Ð & v Ðà  àà ` àIn€determining€whether€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€post-conviction€court'sÐ  _ Ðfindings€that€the€petitioner€received€effective€assistance€of€counsel,€this€court€considers€(1)€whetherÐ ø H Ðcounsel's€performance€was€within€the€range€of€competence€demanded€of€attorneys€in€criminal€cases,Ð á 1  ÐòòBaxter€v.€Roseóó,€523€S.W.2d€930,€€936€(Tenn.€1975),€and€(2)€whether€any€deficient€performanceÐ Ê   Ðprejudiced€the€petitioner.€€òòStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466€U.S.€668,€687-79,€104€S.€Ct.€2052,Ð ³  Ð2064-2069€(1984);€€òòsee€Powers€v.€Stateóó,€942€S.W.2d€551,€557€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1996).€€We€needÐ œì  Ðnot€address€these€components€in€any€particular€order€or€even€address€both€if€the€petitioner€fails€toÐ …Õ  Ðmeet€his€burden€with€respect€to€one.€€òòHenleyóó,€960€S.W.2d€at€580.Ð n¾  ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€evaluating€counsel's€performance,€this€court€should€not€examine€every€allegedlyÐ @ Ðdeficient€act€or€omission€in€isolation,€but€rather€in€the€context€of€the€case€as€a€whole.€€òòState€v.Ð )y ÐMitchellóó,€753€S.W.2d€148,€149€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988).€€The€primary€concern€should€be€theÐ b Ðfundamental€fairness€of€the€proceeding€whose€result€is€being€challenged.€€òòId.óó€€This€court€should€notÐ ûK Ðsecond-guess€tactical€and€strategic€decisions€by€defense€counsel.€€òòHenleyóó,€960€S.W.2d€at€579.€€Ð ä4 ÐInstead,€this€court€must€reconstruct€the€circumstances€of€counsel's€challenged€conduct€and€evaluateÐ Í Ðthe€conduct€from€counsel's€perspective€at€the€time.€€òòId.óó;€òòsee€also€Irick€v.€Stateóó,€973€S.W.2d€643,€652Ð ¶ Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1998).€€However,€this€court's€deference€to€counsel's€tactical€decisions€will€dependÐ Ÿï Ðupon€counsel's€adequate€investigation€of€defense€options.€€òòBurger€v.€Kempóó,€483€U.S.€776,€794,€107Ð ˆØ ÐS.€Ct.€3114,€3126€(1987).€€€Ð qÁ ÐÌà  àà ` àÓ °X°œXÓEven€if€the€petitioner€establishes€that€counselððs€performance€was€not€within€theÐ C“ Ðrequisite€range€of€competence,€he€must€also€demonstrate€a€reasonable€probability€that€the€result€ofÐ ,| Ðthe€proceeding€would€have€been€different€but€for€the€defective€performance€of€counsel.€€òòHenleyóó,€960Ð e ÐS.W.2d€at€580.€€€The€prejudice€prong€of€the€òòStricklandóó€test€ð ðcontinues€to€be€the€primary€hurdle€toÐ þN Ðbe€cleared€in€Sixth€Amendment€assistance€of€counsel€cases,ðð€but€ð ð[t]his€obstacle€.€.€.€is€notÐ ç 7 Ðinsurmountable.ðð€€òòProfitt€v.€Waldronóó,€831€F.2d€1245,€1251€(5òòthóó€Cir.€1987).€Ð Ð!   ÐÌÒ` °ÒÒ` °ÒA€court€must€consider€the€totality€of€the€evidence€before€the€judge€orÐ ¢#ò" Ðjury.€€Some€of€the€factual€findings€will€have€been€unaffected€by€theÐ ‹$Û# Ðerrors,€and€factual€findings€that€were€affected€will€have€been€affectedÐ t%Ä $ Ðin€different€ways.€€Some€errors€will€have€had€a€pervasive€effect€onÐ ]&­!% Ðthe€inferences€to€be€drawn€from€the€evidence,€altering€the€entireÐ F'–"& Ðevidentiary€picture,€and€some€will€have€had€an€isolated,€trivial€effect.Ð /(#' Ðà ¸ àÐ )h$( ÐÒ°` ÒÒ°` ÒòòHenleyóó,€960€S.W.2d€at€580€(citations€omitted).Ð *Q%) Ðâ â€à  àÐ ê*:&* Ðà  àà ` àIn€cases€involving€a€guilty€plea€or€plea€of€òònolo€contendereóó,€the€petitioner€claimingÐ ° Ðâ âineffective€assistance€of€counsel€must€show€prejudice€by€demonstrating€that,€but€for€counselððs€errors,Ð ™é Ðhe€would€not€have€pleaded€guilty€but€would€have€insisted€upon€going€to€trial.€€òòSee€Hill€v.€Lockhartóó,Ð ‚Ò Ð474€U.S.€52,€59,€106€S.€Ct.€366,€370€(1985);€€òòBankston€v.€Stateóó,€815€S.W.2d€€213,€€215€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð k» ÐApp.€1991).Ð T¤ ÐÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h à€€€€€€€€(1),€(2)Ð & v ÐÌà  àà ` àFirst,€we€review€the€complaints€that€counsel€failed€to€adequately€oppose€the€transferÐ ø H Ðfrom€juvenile€court€by€neglecting€to€€present€options€for€juvenile€rehabilitation€programs€and€toÐ á 1  Ðestablish€the€petitionerððs€IQ€score€of€65.€€When€considering€a€transfer€of€a€juvenile€to€adultÐ Ê   Ðdisposition€in€criminal€court,€the€court€is€mandated€to€consider€certain€factors:Ð ³  ÐÌÒ` °ÒÒ` °ÒIn€making€the€[transfer]€determination€required€by€subsection€(a),€theÐ …Õ  Ðcourt€shall€consider,€among€other€matters:Ð n¾  Ðà ¸ à(1)€The€extent€and€nature€of€the€child's€prior€delinquencyÐ W§  Ðrecords;Ð @ Ðà ¸ à(2)€The€nature€of€past€treatment€efforts€and€the€nature€of€theÐ )y Ðchild's€response€thereto;Ð b Ðà ¸ à(3)€Whether€the€offense€was€against€person€or€property,€withÐ ûK Ðgreater€weight€in€favor€of€transfer€given€to€offenses€against€theÐ ä4 Ðperson;Ð Í Ðà ¸ à(4)€Whether€the€offense€was€committed€in€an€aggressive€andÐ ¶ Ðpremeditated€manner;Ð Ÿï Ðà ¸ àòò(5)€The€possible€rehabilitation€of€the€child€by€use€ofÐ ˆØ Ðprocedures,€services€and€facilities€currently€available€to€the€court€inÐ o¿ Ðthis€stateóó;€€andÐ V¦ Ðà ¸ à(6)€Whether€the€child's€conduct€would€be€a€criminal€gangÐ ? Ðoffense,€as€defined€in€ðð€40-35-121,€if€committed€by€an€adult.Ð (x ÐÌÒ°` ÒÒ°` ÒTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„114(b)€(2001)€(emphasis€added).€€In€the€present€case,€the€petitioner€arguesÐ úJ Ðthat€the€juvenile€court€failed€to€make€any€findings€about€his€prospects€for€rehabilitation€through€theÐ ã 3 Ðjuvenile€justice€system€and€that€his€counsel€failed€to€press€the€issue.€€Implicit€in€the€petitionerððsÐ Ì!  Ðposition€is€the€claim€that,€had€counsel€advanced€the€issues€of€the€aptness€of€juvenile€programs€andÐ µ"! Ðthe€circumstance€of€the€petitionerððs€mild€mental€retardation,€the€juvenile€court€would€have€deniedÐ ž#î" Ðthe€transfer€request.€€The€petitioner€argues€that€because€counsel€failed€to€highlight€his€low€IQ€score,Ð ‡$×# Ðthe€juvenile€court€was€unaware€that€it€was€empowered€to€grant€psychological€or€mentalÐ p%À $ Ðexaminations€for€the€child.€€òòSee€id.óó€ðð€37„1„128(e)€(2001).Ð Y&©!% Ðà  à€òòóóà0 ` àÐB'’"&` (#` (# Ðà  àà ` àIn€our€view,€although€the€juvenile€court€could€have€made€more€specific€factualÐ +({#' Ðfindings€relative€the€statutory€factors€for€transferring€a€juvenile€to€criminal€court,€that€court€didÐ )d$( Ðreview€the€evidence,€including€the€petitionerððs€prior€juvenile€court€record,€and€based€upon€all€theÐ ý)M%) Ðevidence,€it€essentially€determined€that€any€factors€favoring€a€juvenile€disposition€of€the€case€wereÐ æ*6&* Ðovercome€by€the€factors€indicating€the€aptness€of€a€transfer.€€Moreover,€we€must€agree€with€theÐ Ï+'+ Ðassessment€of€the€petitionerððs€juvenile€court€counsel€that€the€evidence,€including€the€prior€record€andÐ ° Ðevaluation€report,€showed€that€the€juvenile€court€had€little€choice€but€to€transfer€the€petitioner€toÐ ™é Ðcriminal€court.€€In€essence,€the€juvenile€court€had€exhausted€its€available€remedies€and€hadÐ ‚Ò Ðpreviously€failed€to€rehabilitate€a€young€man€who€posed€a€violent€threat€to€the€community.€€Thus,Ð k» Ðthe€petitioner€has€failed€to€demonstrate€the€requisite€prejudice.€€Moreover,€we€discern€no€deficientÐ T¤ Ðperformance€of€counsel€in€failing€to€take€actions€to€exploit€the€petitionerððs€mental€limitations€andÐ =  Ðhis€rehabilitation€potential.€€Given€the€petitionerððs€dismal€chances€of€prevailing€on€the€transfer€issue,Ð & v Ðwe€must€defer€to€counselððs€strategic€choice€to€pursue€the€petitionerððs€request€by€using€theÐ  _ Ðopportunity€to€obtain€a€lower€bond,€which€counsel€was€apparently€successful€in€doing.€Ð ø H ÐÌà  àà ` àWe€believe€the€overwhelming€evidence€favored€transfer€of€the€petitioner€to€criminalÐ Ê   Ðcourt,׃ ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×ò ò€ó óand€the€petitionerððs€desire€to€obtain€a€lower€bond€fueled€a€strategy€of€acceding€to€the€stateððsÐ ³  Ðtransfer€request€once€the€state€had€established€the€probability€that€the€petitioner€was€involved€in€theÐ Ÿï  Ðcrimes.€€€That€strategy€logically€embraced€the€tactic€that€the€petitioner€should€avoid€testifying.€€HisÐ ˆØ  Ðtestimony€would€commit€the€petitioner€to€a€sworn,€on„the„record€account€of€his€role€in€the€crimes,Ð qÁ  Ðand€in€any€event,€it€likely€would€have€been€futile€to€testify.€€Thus,€testifying€presented€a€nothing„to„Ð Zª  Ðgain,€something„to„lose€scenario.€€The€ð ðsomething€to€loseðð€seems€particularly€poignant€when€weÐ C“ Ðconsider€that,€had€the€petitioner€testified,€he€would€have€adopted€and€essentially€galvanized€hisÐ ,| Ðpretrial€inculpative€statements,€which€in€criminal€court€he€later€tried€to€have€suppressed.€€Thus,€theÐ e Ðpetitioner€has€demonstrated€no€lower„court€error€in€finding€that€his€juvenile€court€counsel€renderedÐ þN Ðeffective€assistance€at€the€transfer€hearing.Ð ç7 ÐÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à(3)Ð ¹  ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€petitioner€claims€that€trial€counsel€were€ineffective€in€failing€to€discover€his€mildÐ ‹Û Ðmental€retardation€and€in€failing€to€employ€it€as€a€defense€theory€in€criminal€court.€€We€agree€thatÐ tÄ Ðtrial€counsel€should€have€been€aware€of€the€petitionerððs€IQ€score,€but€we€discern€no€prejudice€inÐ ]­ Ðfailing€to€discover€or€utilize€the€mental€status€as€a€defense€strategy.€€€The€petitioner€did€not€establishÐ F– Ðat€the€evidentiary€hearing€below€how€any€mental€limitation€or€psychological€condition€would€haveÐ / Ðaffected€his€culpability€for€the€present€crimes€or€would€have€impaired€his€competency€to€participateÐ h Ðin€the€criminal€court€proceedings.€€Counselððs€testimony,€accredited€by€the€post„conviction€court,Ð  Q Ðshowed€that€despite€many€substantive€discussions€with€the€petitioner,€counsel€perceived€no€basis€forÐ ê : Ðthinking€him€mentally€deficient€or€even€for€seeking€a€mental€or€psychological€evaluation.€€Thus,€theÐ Ó!#  Ðpost„conviction€record€fails€to€establish€that€the€petitioner€was€prejudiced€by€counselððs€failure€toÐ ¼" ! Ðdiscern€and€exploit€his€mental€and/or€psychological€condition.Ð ¥#õ" ÐÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à(4)Ð w%Ç $ Їà  àà ` àIn€his€next€ineffective€assistance€issue,€the€petitioner€complains€that€his€trial€counselÐ ° Ðfailed€to€explain€his€legal€circumstances€and,€in€particular,€failed€to€advise€him€that€a€trial€couldÐ ™é Ðpossibly€result€in€the€petitioner€being€convicted€of€facilitation€of€the€charged€crimes.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.Ð ‚Ò ÐCode€Ann.€ðð€39„11„403€(2003)€(proscribing€facilitation€of€a€felony€as€an€offense€punishable€in€anÐ k» Ðoffense€class€next€below€that€of€the€charged€offense);€òòState€v.€Burnsóó,€6€S.W.3d€453,€466„67€(1999)Ð T¤ Ð(establishing€facilitation€as€a€lesser„included€offense€of€the€charged€offense€when€complicity€is€anÐ =  Ðissue).Ð & v ÐÌà  àà ` àAssuming€that€counsel€did€not€impart€this€information€to€the€petitioner,€and€even€ifÐ ø H Ðthat€lapse€equates€to€deficient€performance,€we€are€unpersuaded€that€the€petitioner€has€shownÐ á 1  Ðprejudice€as€contemplated€by€òòStricklandóó.€€The€petitioner€was€otherwise€fully€advised€of€his€legalÐ Ê   Ðcircumstances,€including€the€nature€of€the€stateððs€theory€of€his€responsibility€for€the€crimes€ofÐ ³  Ðanother.€€Furthermore,€by€our€reckoning,€the€plea€agreement€was€very€favorable€to€the€petitioner.€Ð œì  ÐThe€petitioner€was€fully€aware€that€through€this€plea€agreement€he€avoided€the€risk€of€lifeÐ …Õ  Ðimprisonment.€€He€failed€to€convince€the€post„conviction€court€that€had€he€been€informed€aboutÐ n¾  Ðfacilitation€as€a€lesser„included€offense,€he€would€have€eschewed€the€plea€and€gone€to€trial.€€TheÐ W§  Ðevidence€does€not€preponderate€against€this€finding.€€€Ð @ ÐÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à(5)Ð b ÐÌà  àà ` àIn€his€next€claim€of€ineffective€assistance,€the€petitioner€argues€that€trial€counsel€wereÐ ä4 Ðremiss€in€not€using€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€section€37-1-115€as€a€basis€for€the€suppression€ofÐ Í Ðhis€pretrial€statements.€€That€section€provides:€€Ð ¶ ÐÌÒ` °ÒÒ` °Òà ¸ à(a)€A€person€taking€a€child€into€custody€shall€òòwithin€aÐ ˆØ Ðreasonable€timeóó:Ð qÁ ÐÌà ¸ à(1)€Release€the€child€to€such€child's€parents,€guardian€or€otherÐ C“ Ðcustodian€upon€a€promise€by€such€person€or€persons€to€bring€the€childÐ ,| Ðbefore€the€court€when€requested€by€the€court€unless€such€child'sÐ e Ðdetention€or€shelter€care€is€warranted€or€required€under€ðð€37-1-114;€Ð þN ÐorÐ ç 7 ÐÌà ¸ à(2)€Bring€the€child€before€the€court€or€deliver€such€child€to€aÐ ¹" ! Ðdetention€or€shelter€care€facility€designated€by€the€court€or€to€aÐ ¢#ò" Ðmedical€facility€if€the€child€is€believed€to€suffer€from€a€seriousÐ ‹$Û# Ðphysical€condition€or€illness€which€requires€prompt€treatment.€€AÐ t%Ä $ Ðperson€taking€a€child€into€custody€shall€give€notice€thereof,€togetherÐ ]&­!% Ðwith€a€reason€for€taking€the€child€into€custody,€to€a€parent,€guardianÐ F'–"& Ðor€other€custodian€and€to€the€court.€€If€the€child€is€taken€into€custodyÐ /(#' Ðpursuant€to€the€provisions€of€ðð€37-1-113(a)(3)€prior€to€the€filing€of€aÐ )h$( Ðpetition,€a€petition€under€ðð€37-1-120€shall€be€filed€as€soon€as€possibleÐ *Q%) Ðbut€in€no€event€later€than€two€(2)€days€after€the€child€is€taken€intoÐ ê*:&* Ðcustody€excluding€Saturdays,€Sundays€and€legal€holidays.Ð Ó+#'+ ÐÑ²Ï Ñâ âÑTRXì3Ø'LetterXì3Ø'Letter3Ø'Letter qÁ ÐÌà  àà ` àÓ °X3Ø'Letter ÓÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  ÑÔ€¼TÑâ âÑ  ÑÌà ¸ à(b)€If€a€parent,€guardian€or€other€custodian,€when€requested,Ð ™é Ðfails€to€bring€the€child€before€the€court€as€provided€in€subsection€(a),Ð ‚Ò Ðthe€court€may€issue€its€warrant€directing€that€the€child€be€taken€intoÐ k» Ðcustody€and€brought€before€the€court.Ð T¤ ЀÌÒ°` ÒÒ°` ÒTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€37„1„115(a),€(b)€(2001)€(emphasis€added);€òòsee€id.óó€ðð€37-1-127(c)€(2001)Ð & v Ð(providing€that€"[a]n€extra-judicial€statement,€if€obtained€in€the€course€of€violation€of€this€part€orÐ  _ Ðwhich€would€be€constitutionally€inadmissible€in€a€criminal€proceeding,€shall€not€be€used€against€[aÐ ø H Ðchild]").Ð á 1  ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€petitioner€relies€upon€his€testimony€that€on€January€25,€1999,€he€spent€up€to€twoÐ ³  Ðand€one„half€hours€at€the€CJC,€where€he€was€interrogated€and€gave€an€inculpative€statement,€beforeÐ œì  Ðbeing€brought€to€the€juvenile€center,€where€he€was€again€interrogated€and€gave€another€statement.€Ð …Õ  ÐThe€petitioner€testified€that,€in€total,€six€or€seven€hours€elapsed€between€the€time€he€was€picked€upÐ n¾  Ðat€his€residence€and€the€time€he€was€ultimately€ð ðbookedðð€at€the€juvenile€center.€€Ð W§  Ѐ€Ð @ Ðà  àà ` àIn€our€view,€the€petitioner€has€failed€to€show€that€he€was€prejudiced€by€counselððsÐ )y Ðfailure€to€raise€the€statutory€issue€in€the€motion€to€suppress.€€€First,€our€supreme€court€has€held€thatÐ b ÐCode€section€37-1-127(c)€guarantees€only€that€a€juvenile's€statements€taken€in€violation€of€sectionÐ ûK Ð37-1-115€will€not€be€used€against€him€or€her€in€a€proceeding€òòin€juvenile€courtóó.€€òòColyer€v.€Stateóó,€577Ð ä4 ÐS.W.2d€460,€462€(Tenn.€1979)€(emphasis€added).€€In€addition,€the€petitioner€failed€to€show€by€clearÐ Í Ðand€convincing€evidence€that€the€lapse€of€time€between€taking€him€into€custody€and€delivering€himÐ ¶ Ðto€the€juvenile€center€was€unreasonable.€€Ð Ÿï ÐÌà  àà ` àWhen€considering€the€suppression€of€a€juvenileððs€post„custody€statement,€the€properÐ qÁ Ðð ðinquiry€is€whether€the€reasonable€time€requirements€of€the€statute€have€been€met€and€whether,Ð Zª Ðunder€the€totality€of€the€circumstances,€the€defendantððs€confession€was€the€result€of€a€knowing€andÐ C“ Ðintelligent€waiver€of€his€constitutional€rights.ðð€€òòState€v.€Lundyóó,€808€S.W.2d€444,€446€(Tenn.€1991).€Ð ,| ÐWe€believe€that,€in€looking€at€the€totality€of€the€circumstances,€the€present€case€is€strikinglyÐ e Ðanalogous€to€òòLundyóó:€Ð þN ÐÌÒ` °ÒÒ` °ÒAt€the€time€police€received€information€about€Willie€Lundy,€they€didÐ Ð!   Ðnot€have€probable€cause€to€make€an€arrest,€although€they€did€have€anÐ ¹" ! Ðadequate€basis€for€further€investigation.€€Moreover,€individualÐ ¢#ò" Ðinterrogation€of€Lundy€was€a€reasonable€method€of€investigationÐ ‹$Û# Ðunder€the€circumstances.€€Within€minutes€of€being€picked€up€fromÐ t%Ä $ Ðschool,€Lundy€volunteered€an€incriminating€response€to€his€mother'sÐ ]&­!% Ðquestion.€€Upon€arriving€at€the€police€station,€Lundy€was€advised€ofÐ F'–"& Ðhis€rights€and,€within€an€hour€and€twelve€minutes€of€leaving€school,Ð /(#' Ðhe€had€made€a€full€statement€of€his€involvement€in€Maxwell's€death.€Ð )h$( ÐAlthough€his€detention€at€the€hands€of€the€police€lasted€beyond€thatÐ *Q%) Ðperiod€of€time,€the€admissibility€of€subsequently€seized€evidence€isÐ ê*:&* Ðnot€at€issue.€€Lundy€was€turned€over€to€the€jurisdiction€of€juvenileÐ Ó+#'+ ÐÑd Ñâ âÑ` °ÑÑ` °ÑÑTRXì3Ø'LetterXì3Ø'Letter3Ø'Letter qÁ ÐÌà  àà ` àÓ °X3Ø'Letter qÁ ÐÌà  àà ` àÓ °XTÑâ âÑ  Ñcourt€less€than€five€hours€after€leaving€school.€€Under€the€particularÐ `  Ðfacts€of€this€case,€we€hold€that€this€was€a€reasonable€period€of€timeÐ I é Ðunder€T[ennessee]€C[ode]€A[nnotated€section]€37-1-115(a).Ð 2 Ò ЀÌÒ°` ÒÒ°` ÒòòLundyóó,€808€S.W.2d€at€447.€€In€the€present€case,€it€is€difficult€to€determine€when€the€petitioner€wasÐ  ¤ Ðplaced€into€custody€on€January€25;€however,€the€custody€probably€commenced€when€the€petitionerÐ í  Ðcompleted€his€first€statement€on€that€date.€€€Sometime€later,€apparently€less€than€six€or€seven€hours,Ð Öv Ðhe€was€taken€to€the€juvenile€center.€€Based€upon€òòColyeróó€and€€òòLundyóó,€the€petitioner€has€failed€to€showÐ ¿_ Ðthat€had€he€raised€the€statutory€issue€in€his€motion€to€suppress,€he€would€have€prevailed.€€This€failureÐ ¨H Ðequates€to€a€failure€to€show€prejudice€pursuant€to€òòStricklandóó.€€òòSee€Kimmelman€v.€Morrisonóó,€477€U.S.Ð ‘1  Ð365,€375,€106€S.€Ct.€2574,€2583€(1986)€(where€failure€to€litigate€suppression€is€basis€ofÐ z  Ðineffectiveness€claim,€defendant€must€also€prove€suppression€motion€is€meritorious).€€Ð c  ÐÌà  àà ` àThus,€we€hold€that€the€record€supports€the€post„conviction€courtððs€determination€thatÐ 5Õ  Ðthe€petitioner€failed€to€establish€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel.Ð ¾  ÐÌà  àà ` àà ¸ à€€€€€b.€€Involuntary,€Unknowing€Guilty€Pleas.Ð ð ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€petitioner€next€claims€that€his€guilty€pleas€should€be€vacated€because€his€pleasÐ Âb Ðwere€€unknowing€and€hence€involuntary.€€To€be€sure,€a€guilty€plea€must€be€made€knowingly€andÐ «K Ðvoluntarily.€€òòBoykin€v.€Alabamaóó,€395€U.S.€238,€242„44,€89€S.€Ct.€1709,€1712€(1969).€€To€that€end,Ð ”4 Ðð ðdefendants€should€be€advised€of€certain€of€their€constitutional€rights€before€entering€pleas€of€guilt.€Ð } ÐIncluded€among€those€required€warnings€are€the€right€against€self-incrimination,€the€right€to€confrontÐ f Ðwitnesses,€and€the€right€to€a€trial€by€jury.ðð€€òòCharlton€v.€State,óó€987€S.W.2d€862,€866€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð Oï ÐApp.€1998).€€Our€supreme€court€has€identified€several€relevant€factors€in€determining€whether€a€pleaÐ 8Ø Ðis€voluntary€and€intelligent:Ð ! Á ÐÌÒ` °ÒÒ` °Ò[A]€court€charged€with€determining€whether€those€pleas€wereÐ ó!“ Ð"voluntary"€and€"intelligent"€must€look€to€various€circumstantialÐ Ü"| Ðfactors,€such€as€the€relative€intelligence€of€the€defendant;€€the€degreeÐ Å#e Ðof€his€familiarity€with€criminal€proceedings;€whether€he€wasÐ ®$N Ðrepresented€by€competent€counsel€and€had€the€opportunity€to€conferÐ —%7 Ðwith€counsel€about€the€options€available€to€him;€€the€extent€of€adviceÐ €&   Ðfrom€counsel€and€the€court€concerning€the€charges€against€him;€€andÐ i' ! ÐÑ š- Ñâ  âÑ` ` ÑÑTRXì3Ø'LetterXì3Ø'Letter3Ø'Letterploy€it€as€a€defense€theory€in€criminal€court.€€We€agree€t3Ø'Letter qÁ ÐÌà  àà ` àÓ °XTÑѰ` Ñâ  âÑ  Ñthe€reasons€for€his€decision€to€plead€guilty,€including€a€desire€toÐ `  Ðavoid€a€greater€penalty€that€might€result€from€jury€trial.€€Ð I é ÐÌÒ°` ÒÒ°` ÒòòWallen€v.€Stateóó,€863€S.W.2d€34,€38€(Tenn.€1993)€€Ð  » Ðà  àÌà  àà ` à€Although,€based€upon€the€IQ€score,€the€petitionerððs€intelligence€is€less€thanÐ í  Ðformidable,€the€other€òòWallenóó€factors€support€a€finding€that€the€petitionerððs€plea€was€knowing€andÐ Öv Ðvoluntary.€€The€petitioner€had€been€involved€previously€with€proceedings€in€juvenile€court€and€hadÐ ¿_ Ðexperienced€a€previous€transfer€of€a€homicide€case€to€criminal€court,€albeit€one€in€which€the€chargeÐ ¨H Ðwas€dismissed.€€Based€upon€the€record€before€us,€the€petitioner€was€represented€by€competentÐ ‘1  Ðcounsel€who€conferred€with€him€extensively.€€Counselððs€accredited€testimony€showed€that€counselÐ z  Ðrendered€intricate€advice€on€the€issues€at€hand.€€Moreover,€the€record€of€the€plea„submission€hearingÐ c  Ðbelies€the€petitionerððs€claim€in€his€brief€€that€ð ðinsufficient€time€was€taken€to€ensure€that€the€PetitionerÐ Lì  Ðunderstood€what€he€was€doing.ðð€€€At€the€hearing,€the€trial€court€tediously€explained€the€petitionerððsÐ 5Õ  Ðrights€to€him,€and€the€petitioner€responded€affirmatively€ð!ð€not€perfunctorily€ð!ð€that€he€understood€hisÐ ¾  Ðrights€and€that€he€waived€them.€€Although€he€maintained€in€the€post„conviction€hearing€that€he€didÐ §  Ðnot€understand€that€the€second€degree€murder€sentence€must€be€served€at€100€percent,€the€pleaÐ ð Ðdocuments€reveal€otherwise.€€The€petitioner,€in€his€evidentiary€hearing€testimony,€evenÐ Ùy Ðacknowledged€that€trial€counsel€had€imparted€to€him€an€accurate€description€of€the€second€degreeÐ Âb Ðmurder€sentence.€€€Also,€the€trial€court€expressly€informed€the€petitioner€during€the€plea€colloquyÐ «K Ðthat€the€fifteen„year€sentence€entailed€a€requirement€of€100€percent€service.€€€The€petitioner€told€theÐ ”4 Ðtrialcourt€that€he€understood€this€provision.€Finally,€it€is€apparent€on€the€record€that€the€petitionerÐ } Ðreasonably€agreed€to€the€plea€arrangement€in€order€to€avoid€a€possible€life€sentence.€€Ð f ÐÌà  àà ` àUnder€all€of€the€circumstances,€we€conclude€that€the€post„conviction€court€wasÐ 8Ø Ðjustified€in€determining€that€the€guilty€pleas€were€made€knowingly€and€voluntarily.€€Ð ! Á ÐÌÌ€à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àc.€€Denial€of€Right€to€Testify€at€Transfer€Hearing.ÐÜ"|¸ (#¸ (# ÐÌà  àà ` àCiting€òòMomon€v.€Stateóó,€18€S.W.3d€152€(Tenn.€1999),€the€petitioner€asserts€that€he€wasÐ ®$N Ðdenied€his€right€to€testify€in€his€juvenile€court€transfer€hearing.€€€In€òòMomonóó,€our€supreme€court€heldÐ —%7 Ðthat€ð ða€criminal€defendant's€right€to€testify€is€a€fundamental€constitutional€right€guaranteed€both€byÐ €&   ÐArticle€I,€section€9€of€the€Tennessee€Constitution€and€by€the€Fifth€and€Fourteenth€Amendments€toÐ i' ! Ðthe€United€States€Constitution€.€.€.€[,€and€a]s€such,€the€right€must€be€personally€waived€by€theÐ R(ò" Ðcriminal€defendant.ðð€€òòId.€óó€at€155.€€We€find€nothing€in€the€record€to€indicate€that€the€defendantÐ ;)Û# Ðpersonally€waived€his€testimony€at€€the€transfer€hearing.€Ð $*Ä $ Ðâ âÐ  +­!% ÐÑ© Ñâ âѰ°ÑѰ` ÑÑTRXì3Ø'LetterXì3Ø'Letter3Ø'Letterploy€it€as€a€defense€theory€in€criminal€court.€€We€agree€t3Ø'Letterploy€it€as€a€defense€theory€in€criminal€court.€€We€agree€tTÑâ âÑ  Ñà  àà ` àAssuming,€purely€for€purposes€of€argument,€that€òòMomon€óóeven€applies€to€proceedingsÐ ° Ðâ âother€than€to€a€òòtrialóó€on€a€criminal€charge,׃!×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€we€have€no€doubt€that€a€denial€of€the€rightò òó ó€was€harmlessÐ ™é Ðbeyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€òòSee€id.óó€at€166„67€(ð ð[D]enial€of€the€right€to€testify€has€been€appropriatelyÐ ‚Ò Ðcharacterized€as€a€trial€error€which€is€subject€to€the€harmless€error€doctrine.ðð).€€€The€petitionerÐ k» Ðtestified€at€the€post„conviction€evidentiary€hearing€that€at€the€transfer€hearing€he€would€have€testifiedÐ T¤ Ðalong€the€lines€of€his€inculpating€pretrial€statements.€€Thus,€we€are€at€a€loss€to€see€how€suchÐ =  Ðtestimony€would€have€altered€the€juvenile€courtððs€decision€to€transfer€the€case€to€criminal€court.€Ð & v ÐFurthermore,€as€we€have€mentioned€above,€the€juvenile€court€clearly€had€unsuccessfully€utilized€itsÐ  _ Ðmost€severe€and€intensive€programs€as€a€means€of€rehabilitating€an€offender€who€is€inveteratelyÐ ø H Ðprone€to€violent€behavior.€€The€evaluation€report€before€the€juvenile€court€said€that€the€petitionerÐ á 1  Ðprefers€to€associate€with€other€law„breaking€peers,€he€is€ð ðhighly€oppositional€and€.€.€.€likely€to€beÐ Ê   Ðopenly€defiant€toward€authority[,]€.€.€.€has€a€high€level€of€homicidal€ideation€in€violation€of€the€rightsÐ ³  Ðof€others€[,]€.€.€.€€has€little€or€no€empathy€for€[his€victims,€and]€.€.€.€is€a€threat€to€the€community.ðð€Ð œì  ÐFaced€with€this€sanguine€portrayal€of€an€intractably€violent€person,€we€are€confident€that€the€juvenileÐ …Õ  Ðcourt€would€have€transferred€the€case€to€criminal€court€despite€the€testimony€the€petitioner€says€heÐ n¾  Ðwould€have€offered.€€€Thus,€he€did€not€establish€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence€that€a€denial€ofÐ W§  Ðhis€right,€if€any,€to€testify€at€the€transfer€hearing€would€have€resulted€in€a€juvenile€court€dispositionÐ @ Ðof€his€case.Ð )y ÐÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  à€€€€€€e.€€òòHabeas€Corpusóó€Claim.Ð ûK ÐÌà  àà ` àWhen€counsel€amended€the€post„conviction€petition,€he€included€a€claim€that€theÐ Í Ðpetitioner€was€entitled€to€òòhabeas€corpus€óórelief€because€the€conviction€court€lacked€jurisdiction.€€HeÐ ¶ Ðbased€this€argument€upon€his€underlying€claim€that€the€juvenile€court€transfer€proceeding€wasÐ Ÿï Ðinfirm.€Ð ˆØ Ðà  àà ` àÌà  àà ` àFirst,€we€are€constrained€to€point€out€that€merely€appending€a€claim€in€òòhabeas€corpusóóÐ Zª Ðto€a€petition€brought€pursuant€to€the€Post„Conviction€Procedure€Act,€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðððð€40„30„101Ð C“ Ðòòet€seqóó.€(2003)€invites€futility.€€Tennessee€law€requires€that€òòhabeas€corpusóó€claims€comply€with€aÐ ,| Ðstatutorily€prescribed€regimen.Ð e ÐÒ` °ÒÒ` °ÒÌà ¸ à(a)€Application€for€the€writ€shall€be€made€by€petition,€signedÐ ç 7 Ðeither€by€the€party€for€whose€benefit€it€is€intended,€or€some€person€onÐ Ð!   Ðthe€petitioner's€behalf,€and€verified€by€affidavit.Ð ¹" ! ÐÌà ¸ à(b)€The€petition€shall€state:Ð ‹$Û# ÐÌà ¸ à(1)€That€the€person€in€whose€behalf€the€writ€is€sought,€isÐ ]&­!% Ðillegally€restrained€of€liberty,€and€the€person€by€whom€and€placeÐ F'–"& Ðwhere€restrained,€mentioning€the€name€of€such€person,€if€known,€and,Ð ° Ðif€unknown,€describing€the€person€with€as€much€particularity€asÐ ™é Ðpracticable;Ð ‚Ò ÐÌà ¸ à(2)€The€cause€or€pretense€of€such€restraint€according€to€theÐ T¤ Ðbest€information€of€the€applicant,€and€if€it€be€by€virtue€of€any€legalÐ =  Ðprocess,€a€copy€thereof€shall€be€annexed,€or€a€satisfactory€reasonÐ & v Ðgiven€for€its€absence;Ð  _ ÐÌà ¸ à(3)€That€the€legality€of€the€restraint€has€not€already€beenÐ á 1  Ðadjudged€upon€a€prior€proceeding€of€the€same€character,€to€the€bestÐ Ê   Ðof€the€applicant's€knowledge€and€belief;€€andÐ ³  ÐÌà ¸ à(4)€That€it€is€first€application€for€the€writ,€or,€if€a€previousÐ …Õ  Ðapplication€has€been€made,€a€copy€of€the€petition€and€proceedingsÐ n¾  Ðthereon€shall€be€produced,€or€satisfactory€reasons€be€given€for€theÐ W§  Ðfailure€so€to€do.Ð @ ÐÌÒ°` ÒÒ°` ÒTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€29-21-107€(2000).€€By€merely€stating€the€òòhabeas€corpusóó€claim€as€an€alternativeÐ b Ðclaim€for€relief€in€his€post„conviction€petition,€the€petitioner€has€failed€to€comply€with€theÐ ûK Ðrequirements€set€forth€in€Code€section€29„21„107(a)€and€provisions€(1),€(3),€and€(4)€of€subsectionÐ ä4 Ð29„21„107(b).€€ð ð[T]he€procedural€provisions€of€the€[habeas€corpus]€statutes€are€mandatory€and€mustÐ Í Ðbe€followed€scrupulously.ðð€€òòArcher€v.€Stateóó,€851€S.W.2d€157,€165€(Tenn.€1993).€€Thus,€the€post„Ð ¶ Ðconviction€(òòhabeas€corpusóó)€court€was€warranted€in€dismissing€the€claim€based€upon€proceduralÐ Ÿï Ðdeficiency.Ð ˆØ ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€òòhabeas€corpusóó€claim€is€also,€however,€lacking€in€its€substantive€merit.€€ð ð[T]heÐ Zª Ðwrit€of€[òòhabeasóó€òòcorpusóó]€will€issue€in€Tennessee€only€when€it€appears€upon€the€face€of€the€judgmentÐ C“ Ðor€the€record€of€the€proceedings€upon€which€the€judgment€is€rendered€that€a€convicting€court€wasÐ ,| Ðwithout€jurisdiction€or€authority€to€sentence€a€defendant,€or€that€a€defendant's€sentence€ofÐ e Ðimprisonment€or€other€restraint€has€expired.ðð€€òòState€v.€Ritchie,óó€20€S.W.3d€624,€630€(Tenn.€2000)Ð þN Ð(quoting€òòArcheróó,€851€S.W.2d€€at€164).€ð ðA€void€judgment€is€one€in€which€the€judgment€is€faciallyÐ ç 7 Ðinvalid€because€the€court€lacked€jurisdiction€or€authority€to€render€the€judgment€or€because€theÐ Ð!   Ðdefendant's€sentence€has€expired.ðð€€òòTaylor€v.€Stateóó,€955€S.W.2d€78,€83€(Tenn.€1999).€€€In€contrast,Ð ¹" ! Ðð ð[a]€voidable€conviction€or€sentence€is€one€which€is€facially€valid€and€requires€the€introduction€ofÐ ¢#ò" Ðproof€beyond€the€face€of€the€record€or€judgment€to€establish€its€invalidity.ðð€òò€Ritchieóó,€20€S.W.3d€atÐ ‹$Û# Ð630€(quoting€òòTayloróó,€955€S.W.2d€at€83).€€Facial€invalidity€means€that€the€ð ðfact€[depriving€the€courtÐ t%Ä $ Ðof€jurisdiction]€must€appear€clearly€and€indisputably€either€on€the€face€of€the€judgment€or€in€theÐ ]&­!% Ðoriginal€trial€record€before€a€writ€of€habeas€corpus€can€issue€from€a€Tennessee€court.ðð€òòRitchie,€óó20Ð F'–"& ÐS.W.3d€at€633.òòóóÐ /(#' ÐÌà  àà ` àThe€petitioner€claims€that€because€the€juvenile€court€failed€to€consider€all€of€theÐ *Q%) Ðfactors€for€transfer€to€criminal€court,€the€transfer€order€is€void,€and€hence,€the€criminal€court€lackedÐ ê*:&* Ðjurisdiction€to€adjudicate€the€petitionerððs€case.€€We€conclude,€however,€that€the€juvenile€courtððsÐ Ó+#'+ Ðtransfer€order€reflects€a€complete€adjudication€of€the€transfer€issue.€€Thus,€the€claimed€defect€doesÐ ° Ðnot€appear€on€the€face€of€the€record€and,€therefore,€cannot€give€rise€to€a€claim€in€òòhabeas€corpusóó.€€Ð ™é ÐÌà  àà ` àAdditionally,€we€have€elsewhere€in€this€opinion€rejected€the€claim€that€any€defectÐ k» Ðattends€the€transfer€proceeding€in€juvenile€court.€€For€this€reason,€as€well€as€those€stated€immediatelyÐ T¤ Ðabove,€the€òòhabeas€corpusóó€claim€must€fail.Ð =  ÐÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àòòV.€€Conclusion.óóÐ  _ ÐÌà  àà ` àWe€discern€no€basis€for€reversing€the€actions€of€the€lower€court€and€affirm€the€denialÐ ß /  Ðof€post„conviction€and€òòhabeas€corpusóó€relief.Ð È   ÐÌÌÌÌà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à___________________________________€Ð U¥  Ðà  àà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àJAMES€CURWOOD€WITT,€JR.,€JUDGE