ÿWPCv …# VUNa %¯ 0(µU:Ýw@ 4W k z 0J‚ 0TÌ 0^ 0h~ 0ræ 0|X 0†Ô 0Z 1uê 0d_ U>à U*B)+DCT AM— ä Bðv~ vÓ‹ D3^ 0@‘ AOÑÆ  0Dæ D/* BY˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLüÏ(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡, øð AZ"Arial Regular   D  D D    "e Ó€³†;$ÔôÔ3|x& 2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d!!!!7Border 1dd€-"Cþÿ << Gÿÿ Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÔ€ ÔÔ€ ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€ XÔÌÌJune€9,€1998ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó dPtPtHHØ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHØ(d'`Styl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  ellan Geneva ÒÒ  ellan Geneva Ò%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ÔÝ  ÝÒ 4 ÒÒ X ÒÑ  ÑÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€ Ô›Ñ7€ŒOXXdðdÈ7ќـ€ÙßR€#$"A1-j|` ç `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌà@ àòòIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEóóÌÌà@ àòòAT€NASHVILLEóóÌÌà@ àFEBRUARY€1998€SESSIONÌÌÌÌDALE€MORRIS€JENKINS,à àà à*à àC.C.A.€#€€01C01„9702„CC„00051ÌÌà àà àAppellant,à àà à*à àMONTGOMERY€COUNTYÌÌVS.à àà àà àà àà à*à àHon.€Robert€W.€Wedemeyer,€JudgeÌÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà à*à à(Post„Conviction)ÌÌà àà àAppellee.à àà à*à àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àÌà àà àÌÌòòFor€Appellant:óóà àà àà àà àòòFor€Appellee:óóÌÌWade€Boboà àà àà àà àà àJohn€Knox€WalkupÌ129€South€Third€Streetà àà àà àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌClarksville,€TN€€37040à àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àLisa€A.€NaylorÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àCriminal€Justice€DivisionÌà àà àà àà àà àà àCordell€Hull€Building,€Second€FloorÌà àà àà àà àà àà à425€Fifth€Avenue€NorthÌà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€€37243„0493Ìà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àArthur€F.€BieberÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà à204€Franklin€Street,€Ste.€200Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àClarksville,€TN€€37040ÌÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:__________________________ÌÌÌÌAFFIRMEDÌÌÌÌGARY€R.€WADE,€JUDGEÇÓÓà@ àòòOPINIONóóÌà àà àThe€petitioner,€Dale€Morris€Jenkins,€appeals€from€the€trial€court'sÏdenial€of€post„conviction€relief.€€Convicted€of€first€degree€murder,€the€petitionerÏreceived€a€sentence€of€life€imprisonment€for€the€1991€murder€of€the€victim,€FlorenceÏOgburn.€€In€this€appeal€of€right,€the€single€issue€presented€for€our€review€is€whetherÏthe€petitioner's€trial€counsel€was€ineffective.ÌÌà àà àWe€find€no€error€and€affirm€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court.ÌÌà àà àIn€February€of€1991,€the€petitioner€telephoned€his€mother€andÏindicated€that€he€might€have€harmed€the€victim.€€A€family€member€alerted€theÏauthorities€who,€upon€investigation,€found€the€victim€at€her€residence€stabbed€toÏdeath.€€Officers€found€a€meat€fork€in€the€petitioner's€back€pocket€which€medicalÏexperts€were€later€able€to€identify€as€the€murder€weapon.€€Arresting€officersÏdescribed€the€petitioner€as€having€bloodshot€eyes,€very€sleepy,€and€intermittentlyÏincoherent.€€He€was€splattered€with€blood.€€The€petitioner€claimed€to€have€takenÏprescription€medicine€and€aspirin€for€several€days€prior€to€the€murder€andÏcontended€that€he€could€not€recall€stabbing€the€victim.€ÌÌà àà àAfter€his€conviction,€the€petitioner€waived€the€motion€for€a€new€trialÍand€his€right€to€appeal.€€In€1993,€he€filed€this€petition€for€post„conviction€relief,Ïasserting€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 à(a)à àthe€jury€charge€permitted€a€finding€of€guilt€on€aÏlower€standard€than€that€which€the€constitution€allows;ÌÌà8 àà8 à(b)à àtrial€counsel€was€ineffective€for€failing€to€object€toÏimproper€jury€instructions€on€the€burden€of€proof€and€theÏdefinition€of€premeditation;ÌÌà8 àà8 à(c)€à àtrial€counsel€was€ineffective€for€failing€to€object€toÏthe€lack€of€proof€of€an€essential€element€of€the€offense;ÌÌà8 àà8 à(d)€à àtrial€counsel€was€ineffective€for€failing€to€developÏa€defense;ÌÌà8 àà8 à(e)€à àtrial€counsel€was€ineffective€for€failing€to€appealÏthe€conviction;€andÌÌà8 àà8 à(f)€à àthe€evidence€was€insufficient€to€support€aÏconviction€for€first€degree€premeditated€and€deliberateÏmurder.ÓÓÌThe€petitioner€also€requested€a€delayed€appeal.€€At€the€conclusion€of€theÏevidentiary€hearing,€the€trial€court€granted€a€delayed€appeal€and€otherwiseÏpretermitted€the€claim€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel.€€In€the€delayed€appeal,Ïthe€petitioner€argued€that€the€evidence€was€insufficient€and€that€his€counsel€wasÏineffective€because€he€made€claims€during€opening€statement€that€could€not€beÏestablished€by€the€proof.€€This€court€reversed€the€grant€of€a€delayed€appeal,Ïrefused€to€address€the€claim€of€insufficient€evidence,€and€remanded€to€the€trialÍcourt€for€a€full€evidentiary€hearing€on€the€post„conviction€ineffective€assistance€ofÏcounsel€claim.€€òòDale€M.€Jenkins€v.€Stateóó,€C.C.A.€No.€01C01„9405„CC„00156€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.,€at€Nashville,€Apr.€13,€1995).€€ÌÌà àà àAt€the€conclusion€of€the€post„conviction€hearing,€the€trial€court€deniedÏrelief.€€This€appeal€followed.€€A€number€of€the€issues€raised€in€the€original€petitionÏwere€not€asserted€in€this€appeal€as€grounds€for€relief€and,€in€consequence,€haveÏbeen€waived.€€òòSeeóó€Ct.€Crim.€App.€R.€10(b).€€The€brief€of€the€petitioner€addressesÏonly€the€issue€of€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel.€€ÌÌà àà àThe€petitioner€argues€that€his€trial€counsel€was€ineffective€during€andÏafter€trial€for€having€failed€to€notify€the€trial€judge€of€"the€difficulty€he€was€having€inÏcommunicating€with€[the€petitioner]."€€He€also€argues€that€his€trial€counsel€wasÏineffective€for€failing€to€perfect€a€direct€appeal€of€his€conviction.€€€ÌÌ€€à àà àIn€order€for€the€petitioner€to€be€granted€relief€on€grounds€of€ineffectiveÏassistance€of€counsel,€he€must€establish€that€the€advice€given€or€the€servicesÏrendered€were€not€within€the€range€of€competence€demanded€of€attorneys€inÏcriminal€cases€and€that,€but€for€his€counsel's€deficient€performance,€the€result€of€hisÏtrial€would€likely€have€been€different.€€òòStrickland€v.€Washingtonóó,€466€U.S.€668Í(1984);€òòBaxter€v.€Roseóó,€523€S.W.2d€930€(Tenn.€1975).ÌÌà àà àThis€court€may€not€second„guess€the€tactical€and€strategic€choicesÏmade€by€trial€counsel€unless€those€choices€are€uninformed€because€of€inadequateÏpreparation.€€òòHellard€v.€Stateóó,€629€S.W.2d€4,€9€(Tenn.€1982).€€Trial€counsel€may€notÏbe€deemed€ineffective€merely€because€a€different€procedure€or€strategy€might€haveÏproduced€a€different€result.€€òòWilliams€v.€Stateóó,€599€S.W.2d€276€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.Ï1980).€€The€reviewing€courts€must€indulge€a€strong€presumption€that€the€conduct€ofÏcounsel€falls€within€the€range€of€reasonable€professional€assistance.€€òòStricklandóó,Ï466€U.S.€at€690.€€ÌÌà àà àThe€findings€of€fact€made€by€the€trial€court€are€conclusive€and€will€notÏbe€disturbed€on€appeal€unless€the€evidence€contained€in€the€record€preponderatesÏagainst€them.€€òòBrooks€v.€Stateóó,€756€S.W.2d€288,€289€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988);ÏòòGraves€v.€Stateóó,€512€S.W.2d€603€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1973).€€The€burden€is€on€theÏpetitioner€to€prove€his€allegations€by€a€preponderance€of€the€evidence.€€òòMcGee€v.ÏStateóó,€739€S.W.2d€789€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1987);€òòClenny€v.€Stateóó,€576€S.W.2d€12,Ï14€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1978).ÌÌà àà àAt€the€evidentiary€hearing,€the€thirty„six„year„old€petitioner€testifiedÍthat€at€the€time€of€the€murder,€he€was€taking€Dilantin€for€seizures.€€The€petitionerÏdenied€that€the€drug€caused€confusion.€€He€acknowledged€that€soon€after€his€arrestÏhe€was€evaluated€and€determined€competent€to€stand€trial€but,€within€the€next€threeÏmonths,€he€began€experiencing€confusion€and€weakness:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àOne€night€...€I€fell€down€in€the€middle€of€the€floor€and€justÏstarted€seeing€orange€spots€all€over€the€wall.€...€I€tried€toÏget€up€and€I€couldn't€....€After€then€...€I€just€got€weakerÏand€weaker€and€weaker€....€I€couldn't€do€nothing€but€justÏlay€there.€€I€couldn't€get€up€and€walk.€€I€couldn't€seeÏstraight.€€I€couldn't€write€a€letter€because€I€couldn't€seeÏthe€paper.€€I€couldn't€dial€the€telephone€because€IÏcouldn't€see€it.€€I€couldn't€go€to€the€bathroom.€€I€had€lostÏall€functions.€€I€don't€know€why.ÌÌÓÓThe€petitioner€claimed€that€his€condition€persisted€until€several€weeks€after€theÏconclusion€of€his€trial.€€He€contended€that€during€his€pre„trial€incarceration,€he€wasÏtaunted€by€other€inmates€and€placed€in€isolation.€€He€maintained€that€he€sleptÏconstantly€during€this€period€of€time€and€had€no€idea€that€six€months€had€passedÏbefore€his€trial€began.€€ÌÌà àà àThe€petitioner€acknowledged€his€awareness€that€he€would€be€tried€forÏfirst€degree€murder€but€claimed€his€general€state€of€confusion€prevented€him€fromÏassisting€in€the€preparation€of€a€defense.€€He€testified€that€his€trial€counsel€visitedÏon€only€three€or€four€occasions€for€less€than€ten€minutes€each€time.€€The€petitionerÍalso€claimed€that€he€was€not€able€to€assist€his€counsel€in€preparation€for€the€cross„examination€of€witnesses€and€that€he€"went€along€with€everything."€€He€recalledÏthat€three€days€after€his€conviction,€his€trial€counsel€asked€if€he€wanted€to€appeal.€ÏHe€remembered€saying€no€but€only€did€so€because€"I€didn't€have€the€slightest€ideaÏwhat€was€going€on€....€[m]y€mind€was€all€messed€up."€€The€petitioner€asserted€that,Ïalthough€he€thought€he€had€explained€his€confusion€to€the€trial€judge€at€the€hearingÏon€the€waiver€of€appeal,€"I€couldn't€communicate€to€nobody."€€ÌÌà àà àThe€petitioner€testified€that€his€confusion€stemmed€from€medication€heÏwas€given€while€incarcerated.€€He€asserted€that€he€had€believed€that€he€was€takingÏtwice€as€much€Dilantin€or€an€additional€medication€not€originally€prescribed.€€TheÏpetitioner€also€explained€that€a€doctor€indicated€that€Dilantin€had€built€up€in€hisÏsystem,€due€to€his€inactivity,€and€had€become€toxic.€€He€testified€that€he€"startedÏcoming€around"€after€he€stopped€taking€the€medication.€€There€was€no€expertÏtestimony€to€support€his€claims.ÌÌà àà àDavid€Howington,€an€inmate€and€trusty€at€the€Montgomery€County€jail,Ïrecalled€that€he€had€taken€food€to€the€petitioner€three€times€per€day€during€his€termÏof€isolation.€€He€asserted€that€the€petitioner€was€"crazy"€and€was€taunted€andÏplaced€in€isolation€only€after€he€had€thrown€urine€and€feces€on€other€prisoners.€€HeÍremembered€that€the€petitioner€was€"really€incoherent€....€€He'd€mumble€[and]€hisÏhand€would€be€shaking€...."€€On€seeing€the€petitioner€several€years€after€theÏconviction,€Howington€concluded€that€the€petitioner's€condition€had€changedÏdramatically:€€"You€can€talk€to€him€now.€€He€understands€you.€€He€talks."€€ÌÌà àà àThe€petitioner's€trial€counsel€testified€that€he€visited€the€petitioner€inÏjail€eight€to€twelve€times€prior€to€trial.€€He€recalled€the€petitioner€as€being€"skinny,Ïalmost€anorexic.€€His€personal€hygiene€was€poor.€...€He€has€talked€today€more€thanÏhe€did€the€whole€time€that€I€talked€to€him€preparing€for€trial.€€He€was€not€talkative.€ÏHe€appeared€to€be€very€depressed,€very€subdued."€€€Trial€counsel€rememberedÏthat€the€only€helpful€information€the€petitioner€provided€to€him€before€trialÏconcerned€his€seizures€and€a€reference€to€his€childhood,€which€trial€counselÏdescribed€as€"traumatic."€€He€recalled€that€the€petitioner's€attitude€had€beenÏfatalistic€during€the€months€preceding€trial€and€remembered€that€during€pre„trialÏdiscussions€with€the€petitioner,€"he€would€seem€to€get€frustrated€with€me€and€sayÏlook€man[,]€I€broke€the€rules[.€€C]an't€we€just€get€on€with€this.€...€It€was€almost€whyÏare€you€bothering€me€with€all€this€trial€stuff,€they€got€me."€€ÌÌà àà àTrial€counsel€testified€that€the€petitioner€had€undergone€a€mentalÏevaluation€in€an€effort€to€develop€a€mental€defense€and€was€determined€competentÍto€stand€trial.€€Trial€counsel€stated€that€the€petitioner's€mother,€who€provided€someÏmedical€records,€testified€at€trial.€€He€recalled€that€the€problems€the€petitionerÏexperienced€with€the€jail's€general€population€was€due€to€the€petitioner'sÏdepression€and€taunting€by€other€prisoners.€€Trial€counsel€recalled€that€he€hadÏdecided€not€to€bring€these€difficulties€up€during€trial€because€he€thought€they€mightÏportray€the€petitioner€as€a€vicious,€hostile€person.€€ÌÌà àà àTrial€counsel€testified€that€he€had€met€with€the€petitioner€to€discuss€theÏappeal€process.€€He€specifically€recalled€that€the€petitioner€was€opposed€to€furtherÏproceedings.€€Trial€counsel,€who€informed€the€petitioner€that€waiving€an€appealÏwas€against€his€best€interest,€insisted€on€a€proceeding€before€the€trial€judge€so€asÏto€establish€a€record€of€the€waiver€of€appeal.€€He€recalled€that€both€he€and€the€trialÏjudge€explained€to€the€petitioner€the€effects€of€the€waiver.€€The€trial€court€found€asÏfollows:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àà àThe€[petitioner]€was€advised€at€length€of€his€post„trial€and€appellate€rights,€which€were€explained€to€himÏusing€legal€terminology,€"plain€[E]nglish,"€and€withÏexamples.€€The€[petitioner]€stated€that€he€understoodÏthose€rights,€and€the€Court€finds€that€the€[petitioner]€didÏunderstand€his€rights.Ìà8 àà8 àà àThe€[petitioner]€was€emphatic,€positive€and€clearÏthat€he€did€not€wish€his€trial€defense€attorney€to€pursue€aÏNew€Trial€Motion,€nor€any€appeal€of€his€conviction€orÏsentence.ÓÓÌÌà àà àIn€the€order€denying€the€petition€for€post„conviction€relief,€the€trialÏcourt€held€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àà à[T]he€waiver€of€new€trial€motion€and€waiver€ofÏappeal€was€done€only€at€the€request€of€the€Petitioner,Ïand€the€record€clearly€reflects€his€attorney's€advice€notÏto€waive€those€matters.€€Ìà8 àà8 àà àFurther,€this€Court€finds€that€the€performance€ofÏhis€attorney€did€not€fall€below€that€reasonably€expectedÏof€defense€counsel€....ÓÓÌThe€testimony€presented€by€the€petitioner€conflicted€with€that€of€his€trial€counsel.€ÏThe€petitioner€claimed€he€was€unable€to€communicate,€to€speak,€read€or€eat€andÏcould€only€sleep€in€the€months€before€trial.€€His€trial€counsel€testified€that,€althoughÏthe€petitioner€appeared€fatalistic€and€provided€little€assistance€in€forming€a€mentalÏor€factual€defense,€he€was€able€to€communicate€that€he€felt€he€had€been€caughtÏand€wanted€to€get€on€with€the€trial.€€Moreover,€trial€counsel€took€precautionaryÏsteps€to€make€sure€the€petitioner€understood€the€rights€he€was€waiving.€€The€trialÏcourt€found€the€petitioner€understood€his€rights€and€the€ramifications€of€waiver.€€InÏaddition,€the€trial€court€concluded€that€trial€counsel€had€rendered€effectiveÏassistance€to€the€petitioner.€€The€court's€ruling€implicitly€accredited€the€testimony€ofÏtrial€counsel€over€that€of€the€petitioner.€€In€our€view,€the€record€supports€thisÏconclusion.ÌÌà àà àAccordingly,€the€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.ÌÌÓÓà àà àà àà àà àà àà à_____________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àGary€R.€Wade,€JudgeÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ_______________________________ÌWilliam€M.€Barker,€JudgeÌÌÌÌ_______________________________ÌCurwood€Witt,€Judge