WPCo e0r&^뮩q`d\_ |u$L(^ZehcF~O hiAR3d],LovLO1ReϜ^~ՋR| SvBrD~6^!T~W-J7c1}r\RC ؙTw^/6UBF % U.  nX 0P$ 4t  0 0D$ w@h U:    U:5M+++++xxxxxxxxxx B666666 D3SSS 0D AO 0D D/# BR<6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpi X%2A`ArialTT3|X%<6X9`(*Courier 12pt10cpiXXx6X@JQX@%2A`ArialTTt10cpiXXX2PQXP(($D  uM%(D(3$ !D      0  (#$  0    P DPDPӀ,cAZ"Arial Regular  $D     3    ݀ KX XInfact,thiswaspetitionersthirdappearancefacingchargesinacriminalcourt.H XXX XX{XX   Ad FILEDXXX{  October28,1998CecilW.CrowsonAppellateCourtClerkdAM ,cAZ"Arial Regular +  $D     1    ݀ KX XThepetitionertestifiedinadepositiontakenonDecember19,1996.Thisevidentiary `  depositionwasorderedbythepostconvictioncourt. C  $D     2    ݀ KX XK KPetitioneradmitsthathisattorney,ScottDaniel,didoffertotakethecasetotrial.However, `  petitionertestifiedMr.DanielalsosaidsomethingtotheeffectthatpetitionerhadtoconsiderthetwentyyearsbeingofferedbytheStateorthelifesentencethatwassupposedlythreatenedbytheStateifthepetitionerdidnottakethepleabargain.# KK#   $D     4    ݀ KX XPetitionercontendsthatbecauseitwasnotmadeclearthataconvictioncouldbeusedina `  laterproceedingtoenhancethepunishmentforsubsequentoffenses,hispleaisnotvalid.Insupportofthisargument,petitionercitesStatev.McClintock,732S.W.2d268,273(Tenn.1987).Itistruethat   statelawrequiresadefendantwhopleadsguiltybeinformedthattheresultingconvictionmaybeused  b w laterasthebasisforenhancement.SeeMcClintock,732S.W.2dat273.However,thisrulewas `  announcedtenyearsafterpetitionerpledguiltyand,asitisnotretroactive,doesnotapplyinpetitionerscase.SeeClark,800S.W.2dat503;Blankenship,858S.W.2dat905n.6. d$$$$'dxd(3$ !  -C<< CLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$   1  ' dxdP Pd !D   ` X7]XXdd7  TR[A'Legal3'A' Legal3'TXXX Xr*<,(j 8` `@Ef ` 8ttxP `  rߛ  INTHECOURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALSOFTENNESSEE `  @cc:;ATNASHVILLE@ZZ8;JUNE1998SESSION DWIGHTA.MAYTON,     T )  p     L      T )   C.C.A.NO.01C019708CC00376  `    Appellant,  򀀀   T ) P     L      T )  CANNONCOUNTY  @  МVS.   L      T ) 0     L      T )  HON.DONR.ASH,   STATEOFTENNESSEE,     T )  JUDGE p    L      T )  Appellee.      T )  (PostConviction)  P  FORTHEAPPELLANT:     T   FORTHEAPPELLEE:   DonaldM.Bulloch,Jr.     T   JOHNKNOXWALKUP  !  d#   P.O.Box398  L      T   AttorneyGeneral&Reporter   p М 301NorthSpringSt.  !` М Murfreesboro,TN371330398           T   DEBORAHA.TULLIS  "P М301NorthSpringSt.   L      T   Asst.AttorneyGeneral  #@  Murfreesboro,TN371330398   L      T   CordellHullBldg.,2ndFl. $0 М (OnAppeal)   L      T   425FifthAve.,North̀   L      T   Nashville,TN37243 p&      L      T   WilliamWhitesell  P(!    L      T   DistrictAttorneyGeneral   L      T      L      T   DavidL.Puckett   +!$    L      T   Asst.DistrictAttorneyGeneral   L      T   303RutherfordCountyJudicialBldg.   L      T   Murfreesboro,TN37130   L      T        L      T      L   OPINIONFILED:򀀀 2@),  AFFIRMED  `6-0  JOHNH.PEAY,  09/3 Judge  ;15 X  @:; 7XXOPINION#XX7p#Ԉ `     ThepetitionerpledguiltytoseconddegreemurderonMay27,1977,andwassentencedtotwentyyearsincarceration.OnMay24,1979,thepetitionerfiledapostconvictionpetitionallegingthathispleawasnotenteredvoluntarilyandthathewasdeniedtheeffectiveassistanceofcounsel.OnJune13,1979,thepetitionerfiledamotiontowithdrawhispostconvictionpetition;however,noorderwaseverenteredactinguponthismotion.OnJuly17,1995,thepetitionerfileda motionforwritoferrorcoramnobistovacatethejudgment.OnFebruary11,1997,thepetitionerfiledanamendedpetitionforpostconvictionreliefallegingthathispleawasnotvoluntary,understanding,andknowingandthathereceivedineffectiveassistanceofcounsel.FollowinganevidentiaryhearingonMay19,1997,thepostconvictioncourtdeniedhispetition.Itisfromthisdenialthatthepetitionernowappeals.  Afterareviewoftherecordandapplicablelaw,wefindnomerittothepetitionersappealandthusaffirmthejudgmentofthecourtbelow.  ThepetitionersconvictionsstemfromhisinvolvementinthemurderofTomϜAlroyRainesonOctober22,1976.Thepetitionerpledguiltyandwassentencedtoatermoftwentyyears.Althoughthepetitionerhasservedthissentenceinitsentirety,heiscurrentlyservingasentenceforothercriminalcharges.Theconvictionthatthepetitionerischallenginginthisappealwasusedtoenhancethesentenceheiscurrentlyserving.  Whenthepetitionerwasindicted,thecourtappointedattorneyBillBrysontorepresenthim.BoydBrysonwasalsoretainedtoassistinpetitionersrepresentation. f8/2 Thesetwoattorneyswerelaterallowedtowithdrawfromthecaseafterpetitionerretained R8.4 anotherattorney,ScottDaniel,ashisrepresentative.Thepetitionerhastestified,bydeposition  #  1      ,thatScottDanielwasretainedbecauseoftheattitudesandineffective ,  assistanceoftheearlierattorneysaswellastheirlackofinvestigationintothecase.ThepetitionerhasalsotestifiedthatwhenScottDanielwasretained,heconductedalimitedinvestigation.ApproximatelytwoweeksafterMr.Danielwasretained,theStateofferedthepetitionerapleabargainsentenceoftwentyyears.Laterthatsameday,thepetitioner,withoutanyadvancenotice,wastakentoCannonCountytoappearincourt.  Whenthepetitionerarrivedatthecourthouse,theattorneyforthestateonceagainadvisedhimtopleadguilty.(Therecordindicatesthatpetitionerscounselwaspresent.)Atthatpoint,thepetitionerandhiswifeweregivensometimealonetogethertodiscusshisoptions.Duringthediscussion,thepetitionertestifiedthathehadfoundapintofbourboninadeskdrawerintheofficewhereheandhiswifehadbeenlefttotalk.Thepetitionerproceededtodrinkapproximatelyhalfofthepintandwentintothecourtroomafewmomentslater.Accordingtothepetitioner,atnopointdidhisattorneyexplaintohimwhowouldimposesentenceonhimifhewerefoundguiltybyajury,thedifferencebetweenfirstandseconddegreemurder,theminimumandmaximumsentenceoffirstandseconddegreemurder,therighttopleadnotguilty,therighttoaspeedytrial,theStatesburdenofproofbeyondareasonabledoubt,therighttotheassistanceofcounselattrial,therighttoconfrontandcrossexaminealloftheStateswitnesses,therighttocallandpresenthisownwitnesses,thepresumptionofinnocence,therighttoremainsilentorthataseconddegreemurderconvictioncouldbeusedagainstpetitionerlatertoenhanceasubsequentsentence.  Thepetitionercontendsthatnotonlydidhisattorneyfailtoadvisehimof 4 +0 theserights,thejudgewhoacceptedpetitionersguiltypleaalsofailedtoadvisehimoftheserights.Thepetitionerassertsthathadheknownoftheserights,hewouldhaverequestedajurytrialratherthanenteringaguiltyplea.Thepetitioneralsopointstothecourttranscriptoftheentryoftheguiltypleawherethejudgeaskedthepetitioner, [h]asanybodyforcedyoutoenterthispleaofguiltyagainstyourwill?Thetranscriptdescribesthepetitionersansweras (Noaudibleresponse.)Thejudgegoesontoask,[t]hequestioniswhetherornotyouredoingthisvoluntarilyandofyourownfreewillandaccord.Areyoudoingthat?Thepetitioneranswered [o]fmyownfreewill?...Yessir.πThepetitionercontendsitwasthesumofallthesefactorsnoadvancenoticegiven%  ofcourtappearance,noexplanationoftheaforementionedrights,pressurebytheattorneyfortheStateandtheineffectiveassistanceofhisowncounselthatforcedhimtopleadguiltyandrenderhispleainvoluntaryandunknowing.  #  2      ׀ $   Thetranscriptfromtheentryoftheguiltyplea,whichwasattachedasanexhibittothisproceeding,revealedthatthepetitionerstatedheunderstoodtheproceedingandhewassatisfiedwithMr.Danielsrepresentation.Thepetitioneralsostatedthepleawasenteredvoluntarilyandofhisownfreewill.Thepetitionerfurtheragreedthatthemaximumandminimumsentencewhichcouldbeimposedhadbeenexplainedtohim.Thepetitionerthenpledguiltytoseconddegreemurder.  Inpostconvictionreliefproceedingsthepetitionerhastheburdenofprovingtheallegationsinhis[orher]petitionbyapreponderanceoftheevidence.McBeev.State,655S.W.2d191,195(Tenn.Crim.App.1983).Furthermore,thefactual 0', findingsofthetrialcourtinhearings areconclusiveonappealunlesstheevidencepreponderatesagainstthejudgment.Statev.Buford,666S.W.2d473,475(Tenn. 4 +0 Crim.App.1983).  AsthepetitionersguiltypleawasenteredonMay27,1977,thevalidityofhispleaisdeterminedunderthestandardssetoutinBoykinv.Alabama,395U.S.238, d 239,89S.Ct.1709,23L.Ed.2d274(1969).SeeClarkv.State,800S.W.2d500(Tenn. 0 Crim.App.1990).InBoykin,theUnitedStatesSupremeCourtheldthattherearethree \  federalconstitutionalrightsinvolved inawaiverthattakesplacewhenapleaofguiltyisenteredinastatecriminaltrial:theprivilegeagainstcompulsoryselfincrimination,therighttoatrialbyjury,andtherighttoconfrontonesaccusers.395U.S.at243.Thecourtfurtherheldthatthewaiveroftheserightscannotbepresumedbyasilentrecord.Id.However,thisCourthasheldthatBoykindidnotcreateaproceduralrequirementthat X thesethreerightsmustbeexplainedtothedefendantandthedefendantwaivetheserightsbeforeatrialjudgecanacceptadefendantsguiltyplea.Clark,800S.W.2dat504.  Ѐ Boykinsimplyrequiresthatthetranscriptofaguiltypleaproceedingaffirmativelyshow  \ thatthedefendantvoluntarilyandunderstandinglyenteredhispleaofguilty.Id.(citing "( Boykin,395U.S.at244). T$   TheUnitedStatesSupremeCourthasheldthatthestandardindeterminingwhetheraguiltypleaisvoluntaryandknowingis whethertheplearepresentsavoluntaryandintelligentchoiceamongthealternativecoursesofactionopentothedefendant. +$"& NorthCarolinav.Alford,400U.S.25,31,91S.Ct.160,164,27L.Ed.2d162,168(1970). P-#( Inaddition,thisCourthasheldthat:  thefailureofatrialjudgetoadviseadefendantofhisprivilege  againstcompulsoryselfincriminationpriortoMackeydidnot, 1n(-   asamatteroflaw,causeadefendantsconvictiontobecome  constitutionallyinfirm.Iftherecordofthesentencinghearing,  ashere,affirmativelyshowsthatthedefendantsplearepres  ent[ed]avoluntaryandintelligentchoiceamongalternative  coursesofactionopentothedefendant,thedefendantsconv  ictionisvalid.Inotherwords,[s]pecificjudicialincantationof  constitutionalrightsisnotthelitmustestundertheConstitution1  orBoykin. 9/5 Clark,800S.W.2dat505(citationsomitted). `    Thepetitionerisarguingthatthecourtsfailuretoadvisehimoftherightssetoutearlierrendershisguiltypleainvoluntaryandunknowing.Inlightoftheaforementionedlaw,thepetitionerscontentioniswithoutmerit.Therecordofthepetitionerspleasubmissionhearing,inconjunctionwiththefactthatthiswasnotthepetitionersfirstexperienceinacourtroom,   #  3      ׀affirmativelyshowsthepetitionerspleawas (  avoluntaryandintelligentchoice.Attheguiltypleahearingthepetitioneraffirmativelystatedthatheunderstoodhehadarighttoajurytrial,thechargeagainsthim,themeaningofhisguiltyplea,thathispleawasvoluntary,hisrighttocompeltheattendanceofwitnesses,hisrighttoconfrontthosewitnesses,andthemaximumandminimumsentenceswhichmightbeimposed.Infact,theonlyrightthepetitionerwasnotspecificallyquestionedaboutwastherightagainstselfincrimination.Asstatedearlier,thisgroundaloneisnotenoughtorenderaconvictioninvalid.SeeBlankenshipv.State,  \ 858S.W.2d897,905(Tenn.1993);Clark,800S.W.2dat505. "(   Inlightofthesefacts,itisclearthepetitionerhasnotmethisburdenofproof.Thepostconvictioncourtfoundthatpetitionerspleawasvoluntarilyandknowinglymade.Thisfindingisconclusiveunlessthepetitionerproves,byapreponderanceoftheevidence,thatthefindingiserroneous.SeeBuford,666S.W.2d +$"& at475.Thepetitionerhasnotmetthisburden.Itisobviousthatthetrialcourtcanvassedthematterwiththeaccusedtomakesurehehadafullunderstandingofwhathispleaconnotedanditsdirectconsequences.Therefore,thepetitionerspleawasvoluntaryandknowing.SeeBlankenship,858S.W.2dat904.v  #  4       2T). Ї  Thepetitionerfurthercontendsthathewouldnothavepledguiltybutfortheineffectiveassistanceofhiscounsel.Inreviewingthiscontention,thisCourtmustdeterminewhethertheadvicegivenorservicesrenderedbytheattorneyarewithintherangeofcompetencedemandedofattorneysincriminalcases.Baxterv.Rose,523 d S.W.2d930,936(Tenn.1975).Toprevailonaclaimofineffectivecounsel,apetitioner mustshowthatcounselsrepresentationfellbelowanobjectivestandardofreasonblenessandthatthisperformanceprejudicedthedefense.Theremustbeareasonableprobabilitythatbutforthecounselserrortheresultoftheproceedingwouldhavebeendifferent.Stricklandv.Washington,466U.S.668,68788,692,694,104 ` S.Ct.2052,80L.Ed.2d674(1984);Bestv.State,708S.W.2d421,422(Tenn.Crim. , App.1985).   Tosatisfytherequirementofprejudice,thepetitionerwouldhavehadtodemonstrateareasonableprobabilitythat,butforcounselserrors,hewouldnothavepledguiltyandwouldhaveinsistedongoingtotrial.SeeHillv.Lockhart,474U.S.52, "( 59,106S.Ct.366,88L.Ed.2d203(1985);Bankstonv.State,815S.W.2d213,215 T$ (Tenn.Crim.App.1991).  Wefindnothingintherecordtosupportthepetitionersclaimthathiscounselwasineffective.Thepostconvictionjudgeheldthatthepetitioner receivedeffectiveassistanceofcounselandthat,baseduponthispleaandthestatements,that[sic]hewassatisfiedwiththerepresentationofMr.Danielatthattime.Therecordfullysupportsthefindingsofthepostconvictioncourt.  Attheguiltypleahearingthetrialjudgeaskedthepetitioner, [n]ow,Mr. 4 +0 Danielhasbeenrepresentingyouforsomeseveralweeksnow.Areyousatisfiedwithwhathesdonetorepresentyou?Thepetitionerresponded, [y]es,sir,Imsatisfied.ThejudgethenaskedMr.Danielifhefeltthathehadinvestigatedthecase.Mr.Danielresponded, [y]es,sir,verythoroughly,yourHonor.Infact,thepetitionertestifiedinhisdepositionthatMr.Danielhadinvestigatedthecaseandofferedtotakethecasetotrial.  Inlightofthesefacts,itisclearthepetitionerhasfailedtocarryhisburdenofprovinghisallegationsbyapreponderanceoftheevidence.Thepetitionerclearlyreceivedeffectiveassistanceofcounsel.  Insum,weagreewiththepostconvictioncourtsfindingsthatthepetitionerspleawasvoluntarily,understandingly,andknowinglymadeandthatthepetitionerreceivedeffectiveassistanceofcounsel.Weaffirmthepostconvictioncourtsdenialofthispetition.   L      T   _______________________________񛀀π T   JOHNH.PEAY,Judge '! ̜CONCUR:̜򀛀______________________________̜JOSEPHM.TIPTON,Judge̜̜______________________________񀛀DAVIDG.HAYES,Judge