WPC # VUNa % 0(bw@4% 9 0lH 0D 0J 0TB 0^ 0h 0r\ 0| 0J 0 1u` 0d U>9U*wB)DC B  AM*wv~hv D3 0@ AO,{ 0DA D/ BHP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,,,,,,0nLh(9 Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($- - STUDVWEXYEZ[E\Ӏԡ #3|xe((3$ !      0  (#$  0  2 0Indent123  2" 0Indent20 23  2, 0Indent30 0 23  26 0Indent40 0 0 23  2@ 0Indent50 0 0 0 23  2J 0Indent60 0 0 0 0 23  2T 0Indent70 0 0 0 0 0 23  2^ 0Indent80 0 0 0 0 0 0 23   ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P 8Mac DefaultMac Default ` X<  9p`(&Times New Roman<  9p`(Arial% Line 7 d""""7Border 1dd d-#C << G  !  #d#   !!   YYY FILED!XSeptember30,1997CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerk   !#d#    !!     Therecorddoesnotcontainajudgment.PtPtHH(FG(HH(d'hStyl{WP}01  HH  2$HH  Geneva  <Px443!#4$*$$*$ KK  Geneva  Geneva .,6 Geneva   h HD: Geneva  h HD: Geneva $$$$'dxd("$    -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd ! .    `       \RA'\!\RA'\7&OXXdd7      R%&#A1-j|`  `@R INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEEATNASHVILLEJANUARYSESSION,1997  EDDIEB.LEWIS,   ) C.C.A.NO.01C019605CR00184     )  Appellant,   )     )     ) DAVIDSONCOUNTYVS.     )      ) HON.SETHNORMAN STATEOFTENNESSEE,   ) JUDGE      )  Appellee.   ) (HabeasCorpusRelief)     FORTHEAPPELLANT:   FORTHEAPPELLEE:SHAWNA.TIDWELL   JOHNKNOXWALKUPStanton,Tidwell&Mendes,PLLC AttorneyGeneralandReporterCumminsStation,Suite507209TenthAvenueSouth   DARYLJ.BRANDNashville,TN37203   AssistantAttorneyGeneral      450JamesRobertsonParkway      Nashville,TN37243      VICTORS.JOHNSON      DistrictAttorneyGeneral       LILASTATOM      AssistantDistrictAttorney      2222ndAvenueNorth,Ste.500      Nashville,TN37201OPINIONFILED________________________AFFIRMEDJERRYL.SMITH,JUDGE   !OPINION !   AppellantEddieB.Lewisappealsthedismissalofhispetitionforhabeascorpusrelief.Hepresentsthefollowingissuesforreview:(1)whetherTennesseessentencingschemeviolatestheSeparationofPowersClauseoftheTennesseeConstitution;and(2)whetherTennesseessentencingschemeviolatesthedeterminatesentencingstatutesetoutatTennesseeCodeAnnotatedSection4035211. Afterareviewoftherecord,weaffirmthejudgmentofthetrialcourt.   I.FACTUALBACKGROUND    AccordingtoAppellantspetition, '   ׀hewasconvictedofseconddegreemurderinJulyof1989andwassubsequentlysentencedasaRangeIstandardoffendertothirtyyears.OnAugust7,1995,AppellantfiledapetitionforhabeascorpusreliefinDavidsonCountyCriminalCourt.OnNovember21,1995,thetrialcourtdismissedhispetition.Appellantappealsfromthisdismissal.   II.HABEASCORPUSRELIEF    Appellantallegesthatthetrialcourterredindismissinghishabeascorpuspetition.HemaintainsthatTennesseessentencingschemeviolatesboththeSeparationofPowersClauseoftheTennesseeConstitutionandthedeterminatesentencingstatutesetoutatTennesseeCodeAnnotatedSection4035211.Appellantbelievesthattheentiresentencingschemeshouldbestrickenasunconstitutional. InTennessee,itisawellestablishedthattheremedyofhabeascorpusislimitedinitsnatureanditsscope.Archerv.State,851S.W.2d157,16162(Tenn.1993);Passarellav.State,891S.W.2d619,626(Tenn.Crim.App.1994).Habeascorpusreliefisavailableonlywhen"'itappearsuponthefaceofthejudgmentortherecordoftheproceedingsuponwhichthejudgmentisrendered,'thataconvictingcourtwaswithoutjurisdictionorauthoritytosentenceadefendant,orthatadefendant'ssentenceofimprisonmentorotherrestrainthasexpired."Archer,851S.W.2dat164(citationomittedinoriginal).Thepetitionerhastheburdenofestablishingeitheravoidjudgmentoranillegalconfinement.Passarella,891S.W.2dat627.Ifestablishedbyapreponderanceoftheevidence,thepetitionerisentitledtoimmediaterelease.Id. WefirstnotethatAppellantfailstoevenallegethattheconvictingcourtwaswithoutjurisdictionorthathissentencehasexpired.SeeArcher,851S.W.2dat164.Withoutsuchashowing,habeascorpusreliefisunavailable.Seeid.EvenifAppellantspetitionhadmadetheforegoingprimafacieallegation,webelievethathisargumentslackmerit. Inhisfirstargument,Appellantmaintainsthatbyassigningeachoffenderarangeandacorrespondingreleaseeligibilitydate,thejudicialandlegislativebranchesofgovernmentinfringeupontheexclusivepoweroftheexecutivebranchtodeterminewhenanoffenderisfirsteligibleforparole.Appellantreliesuponthefollowingtwostatutestosupporthiscontentionthatthedeterminationofparoleeligibilityisanexclusivefunctionoftheexecutivebranch:   ` `  ` [T]hedepartmentofcorrectionshallberesponsibleforcalculatingthesentenceexpirationdateandtheearliestreleasedateofanyfelonyoffendersentencedtothedepartmentandanyfelonyoffendersentencedtoconfinementinacountyjailorworkhouseforone(1)ormoreyears.   `    Tenn.CodeAnn.4028129.   ` `  ` [T]heboardofparolesisauthorizedtograntaprisonerparoleasspecifiedinasentenceagreemententeredintobytheprisoner,thedepartment,andtheboard.Ingrantingsuchparole,theboardmayimposeanyconditionsandlimitationsthattheboarddeemsnecessary.   `    Id.4035501(m).  TheTennesseeConstitutiondoesinfactdividethepowersofgovernmentintothreedistinctdepartmentsandforbidsanyonebranchfromexercisingpowersbelongingtoanotherbranch.Tenn.Const.art.II,1,2.However,ourSupremeCourthasrecognizedthatitisimpossibletopreserveperfectlythetheoreticallinesofdemarcationbetweentheexecutive,legislativeandjudicialbranchesofgovernment.BankofCommerceandTrustCo.v.Senter,149Tenn.569,260S.W.144(1924).Thethreebranchesnecessarilyoverlapsomewhatandareinterdependent.ThisCourthaspreviouslyheldthatthesettingofpunishmentisalegislativefunctionandthatmandatorysentencingprovisionsdonotconstituteanunconstitutionalencroachmentonthepowerofthejudiciary.SeeStatev.Lowe,661S.W.2d701,704(Tenn.Crim.App.1983).Similarly,webelievethatthesettingofareleaseeligibilitydatebythelegislaturedoesnotundulyinfringeuponthepowersoftheexecutivebranchtoadministerparoles. Inhissecondargument,Appellantcontendsthatbyassigningeachoffenderarangeandacorrespondingreleaseeligibilitydate,trialcourtseffectivelyimposeaminimumandamaximumsentenceindirectcontraventionofthedeterminatesentencingstatutesetoutatSection4035211.Suchanargumentmisapprehendsthenatureandeffectofboththereleaseeligibilitydateandparole.Thereleaseeligibilitydateestablishestheminimumpercentageofthesentencethatanoffendermustserveincustodybeforebeingconsideredforparole.SeeTenn.CodeAnn.4035501(a)(1).Onceanoffenderhasservedthatminimumlengthoftime,theparoleboardmayinitsdiscretiongrantparole.Thegrantingofparolehoweverdoesnotendthesentencebutsimplyaltersthemannerbywhichitisserved.Howellv.State,569S.W.2d428,433(Tenn.1978).TheactuallengthofanoffenderssentenceisunaffectedbythegrantingofparoleandremainsfixedinaccordancewithSection4035211. Accordingly,thejudgmentofthetrialcourtisaffirmed.     ____________________________________     JERRYL.SMITH,JUDGECONCUR:___________________________________JOHNH.PEAY,JUDGE___________________________________JOEG.RILEY,JUDGE