ÿWPC4 ;UNJ %˜ 0 (žFÆw@ 4LU:`š 0ˆ© 0D1 0Ju 0T¿ 0^ 0hq 0rÙ 0|K 0†Ç AQM 0žÆ. ô 0Dü 1u@ 0dµ 0@ BY 0Dv D/º Bé D3 U >9 U *w B)¡ DCÊ AM Z †_påÜUL1f}v~ãvÓa(ÈhH  Z 6Times New Roman RegularX($¡¡c:\office\wpwin\template\draft.wpt ÜÝEÞßFeàr‚áDâeãäÓ€ðn~<$, øð AZ‹"Arial Regular3|xð(8(2§ã$¤¤Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  ÝÒ4°ÒÒX°Òà Œ àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó2 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  Ô$&'Cþÿ<< Cÿÿ2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5(3¯$¢¢Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  Ò d($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó(('÷ÿ dxdüÿP Pd%%%%'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman< Œ 9p`(Arial% Line 7 d00007Border 1dd$1Cþÿ << Gÿÿ ûÝ ƒ!ÝÔ€.ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ"ÝÝ  ÝÔ€/ÔÔ€/ÔÓ  ÓÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€/XÔÌÌò òAugust€13,€1998ÌÌCecil€Crowson,€Jr.ÌÔ€/ôÔAppellate€Court€Clerkó ó |Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€.ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ 4 ÒÒ X Òà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€.ôÔÔ€/Ô€The€petitioner€entered€an€òòAlfordóó€plea€on€a€best€interest€basis€to€attempted€second€degreeÏmurder€and€aggravated€robbery€after€taking€a€Jeep€Cherokee€from€a€Shelby€County€car€dealership€inÏ1993.€€After€asking€the€salesman€to€turn€on€the€engine,€the€petitioner€pulled€the€salesman€from€theÏvehicle€and€drove€off€the€car€lot.€€The€salesman€jumped€to€get€out€of€the€way€of€the€vehicle€and€landedÏon€the€vehicleððs€hood;€the€salesman€fell€off€and€suffered€minor€injuries€when€the€petitioner€drove€intoÏthe€street.€€ÌÌà àThe€petitioner€also€pled€guilty€to€attempted€robbery€and€misdemeanor€theft€for€attempting€toÏtake€a€window€air„conditioning€unit€from€a€Sears€store.€Ì fÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€.ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ 4 ÒÒ X Òà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€.ôÔÔ€/ÔWhen€the€petitioner€pled€guilty€on€July€5,€1995,€he€was€given€credit€for€730€days€(two€years)Ïduring€which€he€was€incarcerated€in€the€county€jail.Ì ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€.ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ 4 ÒÒ X Òà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€.ôÔÔ€/ÔThe€petition€for€post„conviction€relief€was€filed€in€March€or€April€of€1996.€€The€time€stamp€onÏthe€petition€is€not€visible;€however,€the€response€filed€by€the€state€and€the€order€appointing€counselÏto€represent€the€petitioner€were€filed€April€30,€1996.€Ì BÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€.ÔÝ  ÝÝ ƒ $ÝÒ 4 ÒÒ X Òà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝÔ€.ôÔÔ€/ÔMs.€Skahan€testified€that€she€was€appointed€to€represent€the€petitioner€in€federal€court€afterÏhe€fired€his€attorney€following€a€conviction.€€She€was€appointed€to€handle€the€motion€for€new€trial,Ïsentencing,€and€appeal.€€The€petitionerððs€family€then€hired€Ms.€Skahan€to€handle€the€guilty€pleas€onÏone€set€of€his€state€charges€stemming€from€the€theft€of€the€Jeep.€Ì \Ñ\R AØ'\ÑPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$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 ÒÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€.ÔÝ  ÝÒ 4 ÒÒ X ÒÑ ` ÑÑ Ü ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÔ€/Ô›œ›Þ ÞÌà@ àIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌÌÙ€ÙœßR€231A1-j|-£` Å `€€@ÿRß›à@ àAT€JACKSONÌÌà@ àMARCH€1998€SESSIONÌÌÌDERRICK€E.€œMEANS,›à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€02C01„9707„CR„00248Ìà àAppellant,à àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à àShelby€CountyÌv.à àà àà àà àà à)à àà àÌà àà àà àà àà à)à àHonorable€John€P.€Colton,€Jr.,€JudgeÌSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà à)à à(Post„Conviction€Relief)Ìà àAppellee.€à àà àà à)ÌÌÌÌÌÌFOR€THE€APPELLANT:à àà àà àFOR€THE€APPELLEE:€ÌÌRandall€B.€Tolleyà àà àà àà àJohn€Knox€WalkupÌ242€Poplar€Avenueà àà àà àà àAttorney€General€&€ReporterÌMemphis,€TN€€38103à àà àà à425€Fifth€Avenue,€NorthÌà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€€37243„0493ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àPeter€M.€CoughlanÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà à425€Fifth€Avenue,€NorthÌà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TN€€37243„0493ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àWilliam€L.€GibbonsÌà àà àà àà àà àà àDistrict€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà à201€Poplar€Avenue,€Suite€301Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àMemphis,€TN€€38103ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àC.€Alanda€HorneÌà àà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà àà àà àà àà àà à201€Poplar€Avenue,€Suite€301Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àMemphis,€TN€€38103ÌÌÌÌOPINION€FILED:€__________________________ÌÌÌÌREVERSED€AND€REMANDEDÌÌÌÌÑ7€j¸XXdæXXdð7ÑPER€CURIAM€€ÇÑ7€‹XXdæXXdì7Ñò òà@ àòòOPINIONóó€ó óÌÌÓÓà àà àThe€petitioner,€Derrick€E.€Means,€appeals€the€trial€courtððs€denial€ofÏpost„conviction€relief.€€The€issue€presented€for€our€review€is€whether€theÏpetitioner's€guilty€pleas€were€knowingly€and€voluntarily€made.ÌÌà àà àWe€reverse€the€judgment€and€remand€to€the€trial€court.€€In€our€view,Ïthe€petitioner's€counsel€was€ineffective€and€the€pleas€were€not€knowingly€andÏunderstandingly€made.€€ÌÌÓ  Óò òProcedural€BackgroundÌÓ  Óó óà àà àOn€July€5,€1995,€the€petitioner€pled€guilty€in€state€court€to€attemptedÏsecond€degree€murder€and€aggravated€robbery,€Class€B€felonies;€attemptedÏrobbery,€a€Class€D€felony;€and€theft€under€$500,€a€Class€A€misdemeanor.× ƒ4 ××  ×€€TheÏpetitioner€received€three€twelve„year€sentences€(two€of€them€Range€II€and€oneÏRange€III)€for€the€felonies€and€a€sentence€of€eleven€months€and€twenty„nine€daysÍfor€the€misdemeanor€theft€conviction.ÌÌà àà à€€The€guilty€pleas€were€the€result€of€a€negotiated€plea€agreementÏwhich€provided€that€all€of€the€petitioner's€sentences€would€be€served€concurrently.€ÏThe€agreement€also€provided€that€the€petitioner€was€to€serve€these€state€sentencesÏconcurrently€with€a€prior€federal€sentence€of€forty„six€months.€€This€agreement€isÏmemorialized€in€the€"negotiated€plea€agreement"€and€also€on€the€judgment€sheets.€ÏThe€transcript€of€the€submission€hearing€confirms€that€the€petitioner,€his€counsel,Ìthe€assistant€district€attorney,€and€the€trial€judge,€agreed€that€the€state€sentencesÏshould€be€served€concurrently€with€the€federal€sentence.€€The€trial€judge€orderedÏthat€the€petitioner€be€transferred€to€the€Federal€Bureau€of€Prisons€to€begin€servingÏhis€state€sentence.€€Later,€federal€officials€refused€to€accept€the€petitioner.ÌÌà àà àAt€the€time€of€his€sentencing€in€federal€district€court,€the€petitioner€wasÏin€state€custody€but€had€not€been€convicted€of€the€state€offenses.€The€federalÏjudgment€ordered€that€his€federal€sentence€be€served€concurrently€with€anotherÏfederal€sentence€but€did€not€address€the€pending€state€cases.€After€his€sentencingÏin€federal€court,€the€petitioner€was€returned€to€state€custody.ÌÌà àà àThe€petitioner€did€not€appeal.€€He€has€been€serving€time€in€stateÍprison€since€July€1995.× ƒ5 ××  ×€€He€has€yet€to€serve€any€federal€time.€ÌÌÓ  Óò òPetition€for€Post„Conviction€ReliefÌÓ  Óó óà àà àWithin€a€year€of€the€state€court€judgment,€the€petitioner€filed€a€petitionÏfor€post„conviction€relief€alleging€that€his€plea€was€defective.× ƒ6 ××  ×€€Post„convictionÏcounsel€was€appointed€and€an€amended€petition€was€filed€July€15,€1996,€allegingÏthat€petitioner's€trial€counsel€was€ineffective.€ÌÌà àà àAn€evidentiary€hearing€was€held€February€27,€1997.€€The€testimonyÏdemonstrated€€that€€Attorney€Paula€Skahan€represented€the€petitioner€on€theÏfederal€charges× ƒ7 ××  ×€and€the€state€charges€stemming€from€the€robbery€at€the€carÏdealership.€€Attorney€William€Moore€represented€the€petitioner€on€the€remainingÏstate€charges.€€The€record€establishes€that€Ms.€Skahan€told€the€petitioner€that€all€ofÍthe€sentences,€state€and€federal,€would€be€served€concurrently.€€SheÏacknowledged€that€the€federal€authorities€did,€indeed,€refuse€to€take€the€petitionerÏinto€custody.€€The€petitioner€testified€that€he€would€not€have€entered€the€guilty€pleasÏhad€he€known€his€state€and€federal€sentences€would€not€be€served€concurrently.€ÌÌà àà àNo€one€asked€Ms.€Skahan€at€the€post„conviction€hearing€if€she€everÏdiscussed€with€federal€officials€„„€before€the€pleas€were€entered€in€state€court€„„€theÏplan€to€have€the€state€sentences€concurrent€with€the€federal€sentence€alreadyÏimposed.€€Our€inference€from€the€proof€available€is€that€she€did€not.€€It€was€not€untilÏafter€the€sentencing€hearing€that€€Ms.€Skahan€learned€the€federal€authorities€wouldÏnot€honor€the€agreement.€€She€contacted€the€Federal€Bureau€of€Prisons€and€wasÏtold€state€courts€had€no€authority€to€order€the€petitioner€into€federal€custody.€ÌÌà àà àThe€trial€court€denied€the€petition€for€post„conviction€relief,€finding€thatÏthe€petitionerððs€pleas€were€freely€and€voluntarily€given€and€the€attorney'sÏrepresentation€was€effective.€The€petitioner€was€referred€to€the€federal€system€forÏany€possible€remedy.€€Ì€€ÌÓ  Óò òFederal€Courtó óÌÓ  Óà àà àThe€petitioner€tried€to€obtain€relief€in€federal€court.€€In€1996,€while€inÍstate€prison,€the€petitioner€filed€a€motion€in€federal€district€court€asking€to€be€takenÏinto€federal€custody.€€The€district€court€denied€the€request.€€On€appeal,€the€UnitedÌStates€Court€of€Appeals€for€the€Sixth€Circuit€€noted€that€when€the€petitioner€€wasÏsentenced€in€federal€court€he€was€in€state€custody€although€he€had€not€beenÏconvicted€or€sentenced€in€state€court.€€òòUnited€States€v.€Derrick€Eugene€Meansóó,€No.Ï97„5316,€1997€WL€584259,€at€*€1€(6th€Cir.,€Sept.€19,€1997).€€The€federal€judgmentÏdirected€that€the€petitionerððs€federal€sentence€be€served€concurrently€with€òòanotheróóÏòòfederalóó€òòsentenceóó€but€did€not€address€the€state€sentences€because€they€had€notÏbeen€imposed.€€Later,€federal€officials€chose€not€to€accept€the€petitioner€until€afterÏthe€service€of€the€state€sentence.€€The€Sixth€Circuit€upheld€the€district€court'sÏfindings€that€(a)€the€district€court€lacked€the€power€to€order€the€United€States€to€runÏa€federal€sentence€concurrently€with€a€state€sentence€that€had€not€been€imposed;Ï(b)€the€United€States€was€not€a€party€to€the€state€court€plea€agreement;€and€(c)€theÏstate€court€could€not€order€federal€authorities€to€accept€the€petitioner€for€service€ofÏsentence.€€The€Sixth€Circuit€ruled€that€federal€prison€officials€are€under€noÏobligation€to€take€state€prisoners€into€custody€until€they€are€released€from€stateÏsentence.€€òòId.óó€at€*€2.ÌÌÓ  Óò òAppeal€of€Denial€of€Post„Conviction€Reliefó óÌÓ  Óà àà àIn€this€appeal,€the€state€concedes€that€the€petitionerððs€pleas€were€notÍknowingly€made€because€he€had€bargained€to€receive€state€credit€for€his€timeÏspent€in€federal€prison.€€Now,€of€course,€he€is€serving€consecutive€state€and€federalÏsentences.€ÌÌà àà àDuring€oral€argument,€this€court€encouraged€the€parties€to€attempt€aÏsettlement.€€Correspondence€from€the€state€attorney€general's€office€indicates€thatÏthe€district€attorney€general's€office€in€Shelby€County€has€declined€to€engage€inÏfurther€plea€negotiations€with€the€petitioner.€€Both€the€state€and€counsel€for€theÏpetitioner€had€asked€that€the€matter€be€resolved€by€order€of€this€court.€€ÌÌÓ  Ó€ò òKnowingness€of€the€Guilty€Pleasó óÌÓ  Óà àà àFindings€of€the€post„conviction€court€are€binding€on€appeal€unless€theÏevidence€preponderates€otherwise.€€òòButler€v.€Stateóó,€789€S.W.2d€898,€899€(Tenn.Ï1990).€This€court€may€not€reweigh€or€reevaluate€the€evidence€or€substitute€itsÏinferences€for€those€drawn€by€the€post„conviction€court.€Moreover,€the€questionsÏconcerning€the€credibility€of€witnesses€and€weight€and€value€to€be€given€theirÏtestimony€are€for€resolution€by€the€post„conviction€court.€€òòBlack€v.€Stateóó,€794ÏS.W.2d€752,€755€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1990).ÌÌà àà àAs€conceded€by€the€state,€however,€this€court€must€conclude€that€theÍevidence€in€the€record€preponderates€against€the€findings€of€the€trial€court.€€TheÏpetitioner's€guilty€pleas€were€not€knowingly€entered.€€Clearly,€the€petitioner€pledÏguilty€under€the€belief€that€he€would€receive€credit€toward€his€state€sentence€whileÏin€federal€prison.€€The€trial€judge€ordered€that€the€petitioner€be€sent€to€federalÏprison.€€All€parties€relied€on€that€directive.€€Once€the€sentence€had€been€completedÏin€the€federal€system,€the€petitioner€was€to€be€transferred€to€state€prison€to€serveÏthe€remainder€of€his€time.€€Because€the€petitioner€was€sent€to€state€prison€first,€heÏis,€contrary€to€the€intent€of€the€plea€agreement,€serving€consecutive€sentences.€€HisÏtotal€time€of€incarceration€will€far€exceed€that€anticipated€in€the€agreement.€€Had€theÏpetitioner€known€the€terms€of€the€plea€bargain€would€not€be€fulfilled,€he€would€notÏhave€pled€guilty€to€the€terms€offered.€€€The€petitioner€has€demonstrated€in€thisÏappeal€that€the€evidence€preponderates€against€the€trial€courtððs€findings.€€òòClenny€v.ÏStateóó,€576€S.W.2d€12,€14€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1978).ÌÌÓ  Óò òIneffective€Assistance€of€CounselÌÓ  Óó óà àà àThe€representations€made€by€the€petitioner's€attorney€were€directlyÌrelated€to€his€acceptance€of€the€plea€bargain€and€his€pleading€guilty.€€In€order€forÏthe€petitioner€to€be€granted€relief€on€the€grounds€of€ineffective€assistance€ofÏcounsel,€he€must€first€establish€that€the€advice€given€or€the€services€rendered€wereÏbelow€"the€range€of€competence€demanded€of€attorneys€in€criminal€cases."€€òòBaxterÍv.€Roseóó,€523€S.W.2d€930,€936€(Tenn.€1975).€€Second,€he€must€show€that€theÏdeficiencies€"actually€had€an€adverse€effect€on€the€defense."€€òòStrickland€v.ÏWashingtonóó,€466€U.S.€668,€693€(1984).€€Should€the€petitioner€fail€to€establish€eitherÏfactor,€no€relief€is€warranted.€€As€to€guilty€pleas,€the€petitioner€must€establish€aÏreasonable€probability€that,€but€for€the€errors€of€his€counsel,€he€would€not€haveÏentered€the€plea€and€would€have€insisted€on€going€to€trial.€€òòHill€v.€Lockhartóó,€474ÏU.S.€52,€59€(1985).ÌÌà àà àOn€appeal,€the€findings€of€fact€made€by€the€trial€court€are€conclusiveÏand€will€not€be€disturbed€unless€the€evidence€in€the€record€preponderates€againstÏthem.€€òòRhoden€v.€Stateóó,€816€S.W.2d€56,€60€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1991);€òòBrooks€v.ÏStateóó,€756€S.W.2d€288,€289€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1988).€€The€burden€is€on€theÏpetitioner€to€show€that€the€evidence€preponderated€against€those€findings.€€òòClennyóó,Ï576€S.W.2d€at€14.ÌÌà àà àThe€petitioner€claims€that€Attorney€Skahan€had€a€duty€to€investigateÏwhether€the€terms€of€the€plea€could€be€implemented€before€rendering€advice€onÏwhether€to€accept€the€plea€bargain.€€Attorney€Skahan€testified€that€she€representedÏthe€petitioner€in€federal€court€on€the€motion€for€new€trial,€the€sentencing€hearing,Ïand€the€appeal.€€She€was€employed€by€the€petitionerððs€family€on€a€limited€basis,Íessentially€to€represent€the€petitioner€for€the€purpose€of€guilty€pleas€in€state€court.€ÏDuring€the€time€she€represented€the€petitioner,€she€negotiated€downward€the€offerÏby€the€state€from€twenty€years€to€twelve€years.€€She€believed€that€under€theÏcircumstances,€particularly€the€petitioner's€eleven€prior€felony€convictions,€that€theÏagreement€was€favorable.€€ÌÌà àà àMs.€Skahan€had€discussed€the€option€of€a€trial€with€the€petitioner.€ÏThe€victim€of€the€robbery€had€described€the€suspect€as€a€large€black€man,€six€feetÏand€nine€inches€tall,€with€a€heavy€build€and€gold€dental€work;€the€victim€hadÏpositively€identified€the€petitioner€as€the€perpetrator.€€Ms.€Skahan€learned€that€theÏpetitioner,€who€is€apparently€quite€distinctive€looking,€had€been€identified€by€aÏperson€in€addition€to€the€victim.€€She€did€not€believe€it€was€good€strategy€to€offerÏtestimony€from€the€petitioner's€alibi€witnesses€because€she€did€not€consider€theÏwitnesses€to€be€particularly€credible.€Ms.€Skahan€testified€that€the€better€tactic€at€aÏtrial€would€have€been€to€argue€for€lesser€offenses,€such€as€robbery€and€aggravatedÏassault.€€She€acknowledged€recommending€€that€the€petitioner€accept€the€twelve„year€offer.€€€ÌÌà àà à€Ms.€Skahan€said€the€agreement€that€the€petitioner€was€to€serve€theÏtime€in€federal€prison€was€noted€on€"the€paperwork€every€place€we€could."€€SheÍrecalled€that€€she€learned€from€the€petitioner€that€the€agreement€had€not€beenÏhonored€and€conceded€that€federal€authorities€told€her€that€state€courts€had€noÏauthority€to€order€concurrent€sentences.€ÌÌà àà àThe€effectiveness€of€the€bargain€depended€upon€the€petitioner€beingÏsent€to€federal€prison€first.€€All€parties€assumed€that€the€petitioner€would€beÏaccepted€by€the€federal€authorities.€€The€trial€court€so€ordered€based€upon€theÏcommon€perception€that€there€was€authority€to€do€so.€€In€our€view,€Ms.€Skahan€hadÏa€duty€to€investigate€and€determine€whether€the€terms€of€the€agreement€could€beÏmet€before€recommending€the€plea.ÌÌà àà àThe€record€establishes€that€the€petitioner€has€met€the€burden€forÏdemonstrating€his€counsel€was€ineffective.€€He€has€shown€both€deficiency€inÏperformance€and€prejudice€in€result.€€The€standard€of€proving€prejudice€requiresÏonly€a€showing€of€€"a€reasonable€probability€...€sufficient€to€undermine€confidenceÏin€the€outcome."€€òòStricklandóó,€466€U.S.€at€694;€òòHarris€v.€Stateóó,€875€S.W.2d€662,€665Ï(Tenn.€1994).€€€€ÌÌà àà àThe€lack€of€action€by€trial€counsel€was€obviously€not€the€result€of€badÏfaith.€Yet€the€United€States€Supreme€Court€has€previously€observed€just€becauseÍthe€"breach€of€[an]€agreement€was€inadvertent€does€not€lessen€its€impact."€ÏòòSantobello€v.€United€Statesóó,€404€U.S.€257,€262€(1971).ÌÌÓ  Óò òRelief€Now€Sought€in€State€CourtÌÓ  Óó óà àà àThe€petitioner€argues€specific€performance€of€the€plea€agreement€isÏrequired€when€the€defendant€has€suffered€prejudice.€€While€the€petitionerÏconcedes€that€exact€performance€is€not€available€because€of€the€state€courtððs€lackÏof€authority€over€€federal€authorities,€he€asks€this€court€to€tailor€a€remedy€toÏembrace€the€original€intent€of€the€parties.€ÌÌà àà àThe€petitioner€suggests€several€alternatives.€€Initially,€he€seeksÏimmediate€release€from€custody€on€the€state€charges€based€upon€time€served.€€HeÏcontends€he€could€then€be€transferred€to€€federal€prison€to€begin€serving€federalÏtime.€€In€the€alternative,€he€asks€this€court€to€vacate€the€judgment,€remand€theÏcause,€and€instruct€the€prosecutors€to€effectuate€the€intent€of€the€plea€agreementÏand€to€bargain€in€good€faith.€€Finally,€he€argues€that€his€state€sentence€should€beÏreduced€by€forty„six€months,€the€length€of€his€federal€prison€sentence,€in€order€toÏreap€the€benefits€of€his€bargain.€€He€argues€against€merely€setting€aside€his€guiltyÏpleas€and€restoring€him€to€his€pre„plea€status€because€one€of€his€alibi€witnessesÏ(the€petitioner's€brother)€has€died€since€the€submission€hearing.€€ÌÌà àà àThe€state€observes€that€specific€performance€is€not€available€andÏsuggests€that€the€petitioner€either€face€a€trial€or€negotiate€another€plea€agreement.€ÏThe€state€argues€against€enforcement€of€the€bargain.€€The€state€points€out€that€itÏcannot€assume€that€the€federal€government€will€actually€keep€the€petitioner€for€asÏlong€as€forty„six€months€and€that€if€the€petitioner€received€early€parole,€the€stateÏwould€be€without€jurisdiction€to€incarcerate€him€for€the€balance€of€his€state€term.€€ÌÌÓ  Óò òThe€Problem€of€Concurrent€Sentencesó óÌÓ  Óà àà à€The€Tennessee€Rules€of€Criminal€Procedure€do€provide€forÏconcurrent€service€of€state€and€federal€sentences€if€explicitly€ordered€by€the€trialÏcourt.€€Tenn.€R.€Crim.€P.€32(c)(2);€òòState€v.€Grahamóó,€544€S.W.2d€921,€922€(Tenn.ÏCrim.€App.€1976).€€While€authorized€by€the€rule,€the€implementation€of€concurrentÏstate€and€federal€sentences€has€proven€to€be€difficult.€€òòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Hunóó,€478ÏS.E.2d€579,€582€(W.Va.€1996).€€The€practical€problems€with€the€rule€are€as€a€resultÏof€dual€sovereignty.€€Neither€sovereign€controls€the€other's€proceedings.€€òòSeeóóÏòòUnited€States€v.€Howard€Thomas€Pargenóó,€No.€95„6253,€1996€WL€636193,€at€*€7Ï(6th€Cir.,€€Oct.€30,€1996)€(Court€found€that€€state€court€lacked€authority€to€order€not„yet€imposed€federal€sentences€be€served€concurrently€with€state.€€The€defendant'sÏrecourse€is€with€the€state€who€promised€something€beyond€scope€of€authority.);ÍòòBloomgren€v.€Belaskióó,€948€F.2d€688,€691€(10th€Cir.€1991)(Although€state€courtÏordered€state€sentences€to€run€concurrently€with€federal€sentence€which€becameÏfinal€after€the€imposition€of€the€state€sentence,€federal€authorities€refused€to€takeÏcustody€of€the€defendant€until€he€was€finished€serving€his€state€sentence.€€TheÏcourt€ruled€that€the€federal€government€had€no€duty€to€take€Bloomgren€into€custody.€Ï"The€determination€by€federal€authorities€that€Bloomgren's€federal€sentence€wouldÏrun€consecutively€to€his€state€sentence€is€a€federal€matter€which€cannot€beÏoverridden€by€a€state€court€provision€for€concurrent€sentencing€on€a€subsequently„obtainedÑ€8ÑÇstate€conviction.");€òòseeóóòòalsoóó€òòClark€v.€Stateóó,€468€S.E.2d€653,€655€(S.C.€1996);€€€òòDelÏGuzzi€v.€United€Statesóó,€980€F.2d€1269,€1270€(9th€Cir.€1992)€(State€judge's€authorityÏwas€limited€to€sending€defendant€to€state€prison€to€serve€state€time.)ÌÌà àà àThe€concurring€opinion€in€òòDel€Guzzióósummarizes€the€problem€from€aÏfederal€court's€perspective:€ÌÓÓà8 àà8 àState€sentencing€judges€and€defense€attorneys€in€stateÏproceedings€should€be€put€on€notice.€€Federal€prisonÏofficials€are€under€no€obligation€to,€and€may€well€refuseÏto,€follow€a€recommendation€of€state€sentencing€judgesÏthat€a€prisoner€be€transported€to€a€federal€facility.€ÏMoreover,€concurrent€sentences€imposed€by€stateÏjudges€are€nothing€more€than€recommendations€toÏfederal€officials.€€Those€officials€remain€free€to€turn€thoseÏconcurrent€sentences€into€consecutive€sentences€byÏrefusing€to€accept€the€state€prisoner€until€completion€ofÏthe€state€sentence€and€refusing€to€credit€the€time€theÏprisoner€spent€in€state€custody.ÌÌÓÓòòDel€Guzzióó,€980€F.2d€at€1272„73€(Norris,€J.,€concurring);€òòseeóó€òòalsoóó€òòHunóó,€478€S.E.2d€atÏ582.Ì€Ìà@ àò òReliefó óÌà àà àWhen€a€plea€agreement€is€accepted€and€breached,€one€of€two€resultsÏordinarily€follows.€€Either€specific€performance€of€the€agreement€is€directed€or€theÏparties€are€restored€to€the€status€existing€immediately€before€the€plea€was€entered.€ÍòòHarrisóó,€875€S.W.2d€at€€666;€òòMetheny€v.€Stateóó,€589€S.W.2d€943,€945€(Tenn.€Crim.ÏApp.€1979).€ÌÌà àà àWhen€a€guilty€plea€"rests€in€any€significant€degree€on€a€promise€orÏagreement€of€the€prosecutor,€so€that€it€can€be€said€to€be€part€of€the€inducement€orÏconsideration,€such€promise€must€be€fulfilled."€€òòSantobelloóó,€404€U.S.€at€262;€òòAveryÏv.€United€Statesóó,€No.€93„6572,€1995€WL€6223,€at€*3€€(6th€Cir.,€Jan.€5,€1995).€ÏSpecific€performance€is€a€permissible€remedy.€€òòSantobelloóó,€404€U.S.€at€263,€92ÏS.Ct.€at€499;€€òòState€v.€Goosbyóó,€917€S.W.2d€700,€707€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1995).ÌÌà àà àIn€arguing€for€relief,€the€petitioner€relies€on€òòHarrisóó€and€òòGoosbyóó.€€InÏòòHarrisóó,€the€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€fashioned€a€remedy€after€affirming€a€lowerÏcourt€finding€that€Harris€was€denied€the€effective€assistance€of€counsel€because€hisÏattorney€failed€to€timely€communicate€a€plea€offer.€€When€an€accused€is€denied€theÏeffective€assistance€of€counsel,€the€conviction€cannot€stand.€€òòHarrisóó,€875€S.W.2d€at€Ï665.€€Violations€of€Sixth€Amendment€right€to€counsel€can€be€addressed€by€tailoringÏappropriate€relief.€€òòHarrisóó,€875€S.W.2d€at€666.€€The€Tennessee€Supreme€CourtÏremanded€the€case€to€the€trial€court€instructing€€the€state€to€reinstate€its€guilty€pleaÏoffer€and€negotiate€in€good€faith.€€The€trial€court€was€advised€that€it€could€accept€orÏreject€the€original€or€any€other€plea€agreement€which€could€be€negotiated.€ÍOtherwise,€the€defendant€would€€face€trial.€€òòHarrisóó,€875€S.W.2d€at€667.ÌÌà àà àIn€òòGoosbyóó,€a€panel€of€this€court€also€remanded€a€case€to€the€trial€courtÏand€directed€the€state€to€reinstate€its€original€plea€offer€after€defense€counsel€wasÏfound€to€be€ineffective€for€failing€to€challenge€the€trial€court's€rejection€of€theÏdefendant's€guilty€plea.€€The€state€was€ordered€to€negotiate€in€good€faith.€The€trialÏcourt€could€accept€or€reject€any€plea€agreement€reached€by€the€parties.€€If€no€pleaÏagreement€was€reached,€the€defendant€would€stand€trial.€€òòGoosbyóó,€917€S.W.2d€atÏ708.€ÌÌà àà àAs€in€òòHarrisóóand€òòGoosbyóó,€this€court€suggests€several€alternative€formsÏof€relief.€€€Fashioning€relief€for€the€petitioner€will€take€the€combined€good€faithÏefforts€of€all€involved.€€The€parties€are€first€encouraged€to€make€every€effort€to€fulfillÏthe€intent€of€the€plea€bargain.€€Specific€performance€may,€however,€be€impossibleÏto€effectuate.€€Both€defense€counsel€òòandóó€the€district€attorney's€office,€while€takingÏsteps€to€preserve€the€integrity€of€the€state€sentence,€should€contact€the€federalÏauthorities€and€determine€whether€the€federal€authorities€would€be€willing€to€acceptÏthe€petitioner€for€his€federal€sentence.ÌÌà àà àIf€specific€performance€is€an€impossibility,€the€parties€should€enter€intoÍnew€plea€negotiations€taking€into€account€the€intentions€of€the€failed€pleaÏagreement.€€The€agreement€failed€through€no€fault€of€the€petitioner.€€In€our€view,Ïplea€negotiations€and€sentencing€should€take€into€account€the€time€the€petitionerÏhas€served€in€prison€and€in€the€county€jail.€€If€these€avenues€do€not€provide€aÏsatisfactory€resolution,€the€petitioner€may€be€allowed€to€withdraw€his€guilty€pleasÏaltogether€and€face€trial.ÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àò òPER€CURIAM€Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àGary€R.€Wade,€JudgeÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àJerry€L.€Smith,€Judge€Ìà àà àó ó