ÿWPCJ …# VUNa %¯ 0(µ4Ýñ  w@4 0Jt 0T¾ 0^ 0hp 0rØ 0|J 0†Æ 0L 1uÜ 0dQ U>µ B)ó DCU*_ AM‰ BÖîóv~ávÓ_ D32 0@e AO¥Æô 0Dº D/þ B-˜HP LaserJet 4HPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLlÎ(ÈhH  Z ‹6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡Úƒç"3|xQ ÿBYERSÿÿBYERSÿ = > E? @ UA EB C ED [E EF Ó€2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman% Line 7 d!!!!7Border 1dd< Œ 9p`(Arial€-"Cþÿ << Gÿÿ d äÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€ ÔÝ  ÝÔ€#ÔÔ€#ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€#XÔÌÌò òSeptember€19,€1997ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€#ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó óPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò%%%%'ÿÿdxd("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€ ÔÝ  Ý›Ò ž ÒÒ ° ÒÒ ž ÒÒ £ ÒÑ  ÑÑ\R AØ'\ќـ€ÙÓ  ÓÔ€#ÔÑ\R AØ'\ÑßR€$&"A1-j|` Å `€€@ÿRß›Þ ÞÌÌÌÌIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌAT€KNOXVILLEÌÌSEPTEMBER€1995€SESSIONÌÌÌÌÒ ž ÒÒ î ÒÓ  ÓJAIMIE€K.€LOVATO,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àAppellant,à àà àà à)à àNO.€03C01„9410„CR„00375Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àGREENE€COUNTY€œCRIMINAL›ÌV.à àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNO.€C11793Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àHON.€JAMES€E.€BECKNER,€JUDGE€ÌœSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,›à àà àà à)à àÌà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àœPost„Conviction›Ì€à àà àà àà àà àà à)à à€€à àà àà àà àÌà àœà àAppellee.›à àà àœà à)›ÌÌÌÌÌòòFOR€THE€APPELLANTóó:à àà àà àà àòòFOR€THE€APPELLEEóó:ÌÌPaul€G.€Whetstoneà àà àà àà àà àCharles€W.€BursonÌ502€North€Jackson€Streetà àà àà àà àAttorney€General€and€ReporterÌMorristown,€Tennessee€37814à àà à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àœChristiana€S.€Shevalier›Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à450€James€Robertson€ParkwayÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€Tennessee€37243„0943ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àC.€Berkeley€Bell,€Jr.Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌÒ ž ÒÒ , Òà àà àà àà àà àà àà àÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àCecil€MillsÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à109€South€Main€Street,€Suite€501Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àGreeneville,€Tennessee€37743ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€_______________ÌÌÌÌAffirmedÌÌÌÌLee€Russell,€Special€JudgeÌÒ ž ÒÒ X Òòòò òÓ  ÓÓ` °ŽXB'0*ŒXÓÌœOPINIONó óÌ›ÌÑ7€¥_XXdìXXdì7ÑÌÓÓÓ  Óà àóóThis€is€an€appeal€from€the€dismissal€of€a€Petition€for€Post„Conviction€ReliefÏfiled€òòpro€se€óóby€Jaimie€K.€Lovato€(ð ðPetitionerðð).€€The€Petition€was€dismissed€by€the€trialÏjudge€without€a€hearing€and€without€the€appointment€of€counsel.€€The€Order€statedÏthat€the€Petition€was€dismissed€on€the€grounds€that€all€issues€raised€had€beenÏpreviously€determined€or€waived€under€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€œ40„30„102›Ïand€that€the€œPetition›€was€time„barred€under€Tennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€40„30„102.€€The€Petitioner€has€appealed€the€dismissal€on€the€grounds€that€counsel€shouldÏhave€been€appointed€and€a€full€evidentiary€hearing€held€on€the€Petition,€on€theÏgrounds€that€the€three€year€statute€of€œlimitation›€had€not€passed€since€final€dispositionÏof€the€Petitionerððs€previous€Petition€for€Post„Conviction€œRelief,›€œand›€on€the€groundsÏthat€the€issues€raised€in€the€second€Petition€for€Post„Conviction€Relief€were€notÏpreviously€determined€or€waived.€€We€affirm€the€trial€court.ÌÓÓÌÓÓà àThe€Petitioner€was€convicted€on€September€1,€1989,€for€a€number€of€offenses,Ïincluding€aggravated€rape,€aggravated€kidnapping,€aggravated€sexual€battery,Ïrobbery,€burglary,€larceny,€assault€with€intent€to€commit€rape,€armed€robbery,€simpleÏpossession€of€marijuana,€criminal€trespass,€and€prowling.€€The€Petitioner€waived€hisÏright€to€a€trial€by€jury€and€entered€a€plea€of€guilty€pursuant€€to€a€plea€bargainÏagreement.€€There€was€no€direct€appeal€from€the€plea€of€guilty.€€€The€PetitionerÏsubsequently€filed€òòpro€se€óóa€first€œPetition›€for€œPost„Conviction›€œRelief,›€which€wasÏamended€by€counsel.€€This€court€affirmed€the€trial€courtððs€dismissal€of€the€first€PetitionÏon€January€28,€1992,€in€the€case€of€òòJaimie€K.€Lovato€v.€Stateóó,€Greene€County,€C.C.A.ÏNo.€03C01„9108„CR„00244,€Opinion€filed€January€28,€1992,€at€Knoxville.€€On€MayÏ18,€1992,€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€denied€the€Petitionerððs€application€forÏpermission€to€appeal€this€courtððs€judgment€on€the€first€œPetition›€for€œPost„Conviction›ÏœRelief.›ÌÌÌÓÓÓÓà àThe€original€post„conviction€case€raised€two€grounds€for€relief,€first,€that€theÏPetitionerððs€pleas€of€guilty€were€involuntary,€and€second,€that€the€Petitioner€receivedÏÑ7€¥_XXdìXXdì7Ñineffective€assistance€of€counsel.€€Both€issues€were€based€on€the€Petitionerððs€claimÏthat€his€trial€counsel€incorrectly€advised€him€that€he€was€subject€to€the€death€penaltyÏfor€armed€robbery.€€No€issue€was€raised€in€the€first€post„conviction€proceeding€aboutÏthe€Petitioner€being€under€the€influence€of€drugs€at€the€first€sentencing€hearing.€€AÍfull€evidentiary€hearing€was€conducted€on€the€first€application€for€post„convictionÏrelief,€and€the€trial€judge€found€as€follows:ÌÓÓà8 à€€€€€€€[Defense€counsel€in€the€original€cases]€advised€the€petitioner€of€allÏthe€charges€against€him;€all€his€rights;€all€his€options;€theÏconsequences€of€his€actions;€of€all€the€evidence€in€the€case;€allÏprocedures;€all€punishments.€€The€death€penalty€was€never€discussedÏwith€him.€€No€one€objectively€can€look€at€this€record€and€come€to€anyÏconclusion€other€than€these€lawyers€did€everything€that€could€be€doneÏin€the€representation€of€the€petitioner€and€that€the€decisions€and€tacticsÏwere€correct€ones.€.€.€€€€[I]t€appears€that€plea€negotiations€went€on€for€aÏperiod€of€at€least€two€months.€€And€the€lawyers€were€careful€to€adviseÏthe€petitioner€of€all€possibilities,€punishments,€options€and€makeÏrecommendations€based€upon€the€great€efforts€that€had€œpreceded›€œ€the›Ïplea€negotiations.€€But€they€were€careful€to€leave€the€choice€of€whetherÏto€plead€guilty€or€to€go€to€trial€to€petitioner.ÌÌÌÓÓà àThis€Petitioner€appealed€the€first€denial€of€post„conviction€relief€to€this€court,Ïand€an€opinion€was€filed€on€January€28,€1992.€€This€court€found€that€the€PetitionerÏð ðreceived€the€benefit€of€very€experienced€counsel€who€diligently€investigated€allÏaspects€of€the€cases€and€ably€represented€him€in€their€preparation.ðð€€This€courtÏagreed€with€the€trial€court€that€the€Petitioner€at€his€sentencing€hearing€ð ðconvincinglyððÏtestified€that€he€understood€the€range€of€punishment€to€which€he€was€exposed€andÏhe€ð ðconvincingly€and€understandinglyðð€confirmed€the€factual€allegations€against€him.€ÏThis€court€affirmed€the€trial€courtððs€dismissal€of€the€first€post„conviction€proceeding,Ïand€the€Petitioner€filed€for€permission€to€appeal€to€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court.€ÏAs€previously€stated,€the€Supreme€Court€denied€that€application€on€May€18,€1992.ÌÓÓÌÓÓà àThe€Petitioner€filed€the€instant€œPetition,›€his€second€petition,€on€May€4,€1994.€ÍHe€also€filed€a€Motion€to€Proceedòò€inóó€òòForma€Pauperisóó€and€a€Memorandum€of€Law€inÏsupport€of€his€Petition.€€The€State€filed€its€Answer€on€June€6,€1994.€€On€September€6,Ï1994,€the€trial€court€dismissed€the€second€Petition€for€Post„Conviction€Relief€as€beingÏtime„barred€and€as€raising€issues€that€had€previously€been€determined€or€wereÏwaived.€€The€Petitioner€subsequently€filed€a€Motion€for€Appointment€of€Counsel,€andÏone€was€appointed.€€Notice€of€Appeal€was€filed€on€September€27,€1994.ÌÓÓÓÓà àTennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€40„30„102€prior€to€its€repeal€in€1995€stated€thatÏa€prisoner€in€custody€in€Tennessee€ð ðmust€petition€for€post„conviction€relief€under€thisÏchapter€within€three€(3)€years€of€the€date€of€the€final€action€of€the€highest€stateÏappellate€court€to€which€an€appeal€is€taken€or€consideration€of€such€petition€shall€beÏbarred.ðð€€The€Petitioner€argues€that€the€three€year€period€began€to€run€on€May€18,Ï1992,€when€the€Supreme€Court€denied€permission€to€appeal€the€denial€of€the€firstÏpost„conviction€proceeding.€€If€that€were€the€correct€time€from€which€to€calculate€theÏthree€year€period,€the€second€application€would€in€fact€have€been€timely€filed.€€TheÏState,€however,€œargues›€that€the€three€year€time€period€began€to€run€as€soon€as€theÏoriginal€conviction€became€a€final€judgment,€that€original€conviction€not€having€beenÏappealed.€€If€the€State€is€correct€as€to€the€date€on€which€the€three€years€began€to€run,Ïthen€the€second€Petition€for€Post„Conviction€Relief€was€not€timely€filed.€€This€courtÏhas€previously€held€that€the€three€year€time€period€begins€to€run€from€the€date€ofÏjudgments€of€conviction€when€the€defendant€did€not€take€a€direct€appeal€of€his€or€herÏconviction.€€See€òòWarren€v.€State,óó€833€S.W.2d€101,€102€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1992),Ïòòperm.€app.€denied€óó(Tenn.€1992).€€Therefore€this€second€application€for€post„conviction€relief€was€not€timely€filed.ÌÓÓÌÓÓà àTennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€40„30„109(a)(1)€provided€before€its€repeal€thatÏwhen€a€post„conviction€petition€ð ðhas€been€competently€drafted€and€all€pleadings,Ïfiles,€and€records€of€the€case€which€are€before€the€court€conclusively€show€that€theÏpetitioner€is€entitled€to€no€relief,€the€court€may€order€the€petition€dismissed.ðð€€In€òòBaxterÏv.€Rose,€óóour€Supreme€Court€stated€that€ð ðthe€allegations€of€a€òòpro€seóó€complaint€areÏheld€to€less€stringent€standards€than€formal€pleadings€drafted€by€lawyers,€and€theÏtest€is€whether€it€appears€beyond€doubt€that€the€plaintiff€can€prove€no€set€of€facts€inÏsupport€of€his€claim€which€would€entitle€him€to€relief.ðð€€523€S.W.2d€930,€939€(Tenn.Ï1975).€€ð ðWhen€a€colorable€claim€is€presented€in€a€òòpro€seóó€petition,€dismissal€withoutÏappointment€of€counsel€to€draft€a€competent€petition€is€rarely€proper.ðð€€òòSwanson€v.ÏState,€óó749€S.W.2d€731,€734€(Tenn.€1988).€€A€colorable€claim€is€one€that€alleges€factsÏshowing€that€the€conviction€resulted€from€an€abridgement€of€a€constitutional€right€andÏwhich€demonstrates€that€the€ground€for€relief€was€not€previously€determined€orÏwaived.€€See€òòState€v.Smith,€óó814€S.W.2d€45,€49€(Tenn.€1991);€òòArthur€v.€Stateóó,€483ÏS.W.2d€95,€œ96›€(Tenn.€1972).€€ð ðIf€the€availability€of€relief€cannot€be€conclusivelyÏdetermined€from€a€òòpro€se€óópetition€and€the€accompanying€records,€the€petitioner€mustÏbe€given€the€aid€of€œcounsel.ðð€€€òòSwansonóó,›€749€S.W.2d€at€734.€€However,€when€aÏpetition€has€been€competently€drafted,€and€conclusively€shows€that€the€petitioner€isÏentitled€to€no€relief,€the€court€may€order€the€petition€dismissed€without€theÏappointment€of€counsel€and€without€an€evidentiary€hearing.€€T.C.A.€ðð€œ40„30„109(a)(1).›€€See€also€òòSwanson,€749€S.W.2d€at€734;€Givens€v.€State,€óó702€S.W.2d€578,Ï580€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1985).€€A€clear€but€patently€non„meritorious€petition€may€beÏdismissed€summarily,€without€the€appointment€of€counsel,€much€less€an€evidentiaryÏhearing.€€See€òòMartucci€v.€State,€óó872€S.W.2d€947,€949€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).€ÏHowever,€the€court€must€look€to€the€substance€rather€than€the€form€of€the€petition,Ïand€no€petition€should€be€dismissed€for€technical€defects,€incompleteness,€or€lack€ofÏclarity€until€the€petitioner€has€had€reasonable€opportunity,€with€the€aid€of€counsel,€toÏfile€amendments.€òòÌÓÓÌÓÓóóà àThe€Petition€in€this€case€appears€to€be€competently€drafted.€€The€Petition€andÏthe€record€available€to€the€trial€judge€provided€him€with€all€of€the€factual€informationÏnecessary€to€ascertain€that€the€limitations€period€set€out€in€Tennessee€CodeÏAnnotated€ðð€40„30„102€had€expired.€€This€court€has€held€that€a€trial€judge€mayÏwithout€the€appointment€of€counsel€and€without€an€evidentiary€hearing€dismiss€aÏpost„conviction€petition€on€the€grounds€that€the€limitations€period€established€byÏTennessee€Code€Annotated€ðð€40„30„102€has€expired€because€a€failure€to€file€timelyÏis€not€a€technical€defect€and€does€not€result€from€lack€of€clarity€or€incompleteness.€ÏSee€òòFrederick€v.€State,€óó906€S.W.2d€927,€930€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1993).ÌÓÓÌÓÓà àThe€trial€courtððs€dismissal€of€the€Petition€for€Post„Conviction€Relief€is€affirmedÏon€the€basis€of€the€failure€to€file€for€relief€within€the€time€allowed€by€law.€€It€therefore€isÏnot€necessary€to€reach€the€Appellantððs€final€grounds€for€appeal.ÌÓÓòòÌÌÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àóóLEE€RUSSELL,€SPECIAL€JUDGEÌÌÌÌÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ____________________________ÌWILLIAM€M.€BARKER,€JUDGEÌÌÌÌ____________________________ÌJOHN€K.€BYERS,€SENIOR€JUDGEÌòòÌÓ  ÓÌóó