ÿWPC!( D´ÃÓ‘ `sÉ]®eË̤½¯w„¼“±õÒB«’ {ùbY9!–U¶fw £ù]òÌFÁÌ=?½{ˆùAÂ\Þ~º§°šB«0îQ¶  èØ+ì€uJÒŠÍ·Ø÷sð-U¨ XÔ›„º% ±<¥BÏ'ØS²Ï•v20rdèz«s ­[V£ïàÏ„lëjpé¡%*|q~HµÈîÄ?t7–—½âCÆ‘Þ#¯ƒrnÿÍà˜«%¨õoj·pøê|ã5”äQ‰Î¶sW80¼õJú n|t0VvtYÂ6ñGº¿ÌãÖ.>A˨¬®fï+´ÆBÀ„ú)ŒEÀî™xØâ¢-~³ÜdÛ< _аÀ¸¯ÿÿðYš¸Ía·jD ‡<‹œcôÈ@Á1hm©/“Ñ>ÒÌçÌûqÛŒ•à¨#šå,î—¹í"‹×þmœÀTÅìËzœÜú™€ã"“¶ Ô½PàPöw¤…‡ýSôžåç{D…# F U:Q %‹ 0G‘ w@Ø 4 , 1m; ¨ 0d°  ã* 0‹  0D˜æÜU:ÂæüU:âWX såËU:° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° Bê ê ê ê ê ê ê ê D3!!! 0D:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:!:! 0~! 0Š " 0 —" 0´7# 0Çë# 0Û²$ 0ï%%%%% AO|&ÆË&Ë& 0D‘' D/Õ' B(˜HP LaserJet 4SiHPPCL5MS,ü,,,,,ü0nLhÎ, øð AZ‹"Arial RegularX(þ,$¡¡Ô€XoÌXXXÔ hiEjk{lmDnDoDpÓ€zuM%ÜßV¡¡3|x} tuvwxyz#,37=CIQYag­­1.a.i.(1)(a)(i)1)a)(<1$´´Ô2Ô6.Ú  Ú0Ú  ÚÔ3  Ôà0  à Ñ ° Ñ ÙÒ°ÒÝ ƒ ³¾ÿÝÔ€X)1XXXÔà ` àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ýà ¸ àThe€phrases€ð ðmental€diseaseðð€and€ð ðmental€defectðð€are€not€listed€asÐ ° Ðdefined€terms€in€American€Psychiatric€Glossary€(American€Psychiatric€Press,€7thÏed.).€€Neither€are€they€listed€in€the€index€in€American€Psychiatric€Assððn,ÏDiagnostic€and€Statistical€Manual€of€Mental€Disorders,€Number€4,€DiagnosticÏCriteria€(1995).(;(3·ú$¤¤Ý ƒþ,!ÝÔ€XÏÂXXXÔÝ  Ýà  àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó ÜÒ°ÒÝ ƒ ³¾ÿÝÔ€X)1XXXÔà ` àòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ýà ¸ àThe€phrases€ð ðmental€diseaseðð€and€ð ðmental€defectðð€are€not€listed€asÐ ° Ðdefined€terms€in€American€Psychiatric€Glossary€(American€Psychiatric€Press,€7thÏed.).€€Neither€are€they€listed€in€the€index€in€American€Psychiatric€Assððn,ÏDiagnostic€and€Statistical€Manual€of€Mental€Disorders,€Number€4,€DiagnosticÏCriteria€50€(1995)., øð AZ‹"Arial Regular ÜÔ€XÏÂXXXÔÔ€jXXÏÂÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€XÏÂXjÔÐ  ÐÌMarch€31,€1999ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAMÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular MÒ°ÒÝ ƒ ³¾ÿÝÔ€X)1XXXÔà ` àòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ýà ¸ àThere€is€no€allegation€that€trial€counsel€deficiently€performed€in€theÐ ° Ðsentencing€of€the€defendant.€€There€was€no€sentencing€hearing.€€The€stateÏsought€neither€the€death€penalty€nor€a€life€sentence€without€the€possibility€ofÏparole.€€Therefore,€the€juryððs€finding€of€guilt€of€first€degree€murder€resulted€in€theÏtrial€court€automatically€sentencing€the€defendant€to€incarceration€for€life.€ÏòòSeeóóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„208(c)€(1997). N Ò°ÒÝ ƒ ³¾ÿÝÔ€X)1XXXÔà ` àòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ýà ¸ àWe€are€aware€that€in€both€òòPenryóó€and€òòState€v.€Laneyóó,€654€S.W.2dÐ ° Ð383€(Tenn.€1983),€the€appellate€courtððs€task€was€to€determine€whether€the€deathÏpenalty€could€be€imposed€upon€a€mentally€retarded€defendant€without€violatingÏconstitutional€provisions€against€cruel€and€unusual€punishment.€€On€this€issue,Ïthe€courts€were€reviewing€only€the€sentencing€activities€of€the€lower€courts.€€€€€€€€€€€Ð pÀ ó ÐNevertheless,€we€believe€these€analyses€are€germane€to€the€evidence€questionÏbefore€us€in€the€present€case.€€Under€Tennessee€law,€the€defense€of€insanityÏand€the€admissibility€of€expert€evidence€to€negate€a€òòmensóó€òòreaóó€element€of€theÐ à Ðcrime€are€òòbothóó€founded€upon€the€presence€of€ð ðmental€disease€or€defect.ðð€Ð €Ð ÐòòSeeóóTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„13„501(a);€òòHallóó,€958€S.W.2d€at€690.€€In€òòLaneyóó,€theÐ pÀ ÐTennessee€Supreme€Court€was€faced€with€the€ð ðmental€disease€or€defectððÏformulation€because€it€was€contained€in€the€prescribed€mitigating€factors€forÏcapital€cases.€€òòLaneyóó,€654€S.W.2d€at€389€(quoting€former€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„Ð @  Ð2404(j)(8)€(providing€for€jury€consideration€that€ð ð[t]he€capacity€of€the€defendant€toÏappreciate€the€wrongfulness€of€his€conduct€or€to€conform€to€the€requirements€ofÏlaw€was€substantially€impaired€as€a€result€of€mental€disease€or€defect€orÏintoxication€which€was€insufficient€to€establish€a€defense€to€the€crime€but€which€€€€Ïsubstantially€affected€his€judgment)).€€In€òòPenryóó,€the€high€courtððs€inquiry€into€theÐ ð@  Ðlegitmacy€of€capital€punishment€for€mentally€retarded€defendants€led€it€to€fathomÏthe€nature€and€meaning€of€the€ð ðdefectðð€aspect€of€the€traditional€insanity€defense,Ïin€view€of€Penryððs€mental€retardation€and€the€prohibition€against€imposing€deathÏpenalties€on€insane€defendants.€€òòSeeóó€òòFord€v.€Wainwrightóó,€477€U.S.€399,€106€S.Ð ° ÐCt.€2595€(1986).€€Because€ð ðmental€defectðð€is€the€rubric€through€which€mentalÏretardation€is€embraced€within€the€insanity€defense€to€criminal€liability,€the€courtÏproceeded€to€explain€that€the€legal€phrase€ð ðmental€defectðð€is€linked€traditionallyÏwith€only€the€severest€forms€of€mental€retardation.€€Thus,€in€òòPenryóó€and€òòLaneyóó,Ð pÀ Ðthe€courts€explained€or€illustrated€the€meaning€of€ð ðmental€defect,ðð€the€criticalÏphrase€for€this€courtððs€task€in€the€present€case.€€Whether€a€court€is€admittingÏevidence,€determining€guilt,€or€in€some€cases,€imposing€a€sentence,€òòseeóó€òòLaneyóó,Ð @ Ð654€S.W.2d€at€389,€mental€retardation€enters€into€the€courtððs€considerationÏthrough€the€threshold€of€mental€defect. ÛÔ€XÏÂXXXÔÔ€jXXÏÂÔÓ  Óò òÔ Ad ÔFILEDÔ€XÏÂXjÔÐ  ÐÌMarch€30,1999ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔdAMÔó ó,c½¬AZ‹"Arial Regular d""""'ÿÿdxd(3¯$££Ý ƒ!ÝÝ  Ý(gfi$µµà0  àÔ2(ÆÔ6.Ú  Ú0Ú  Ú.Ú  Ú0Ú  ÚÔ3  Ôà0` (#(#à(bÕä$¶¶à0  àà0` (#(#àÔ2ˆAÔÚ  ÚÚ  Ú.Ô3  Ôà0¸ ` (#` (#à(xâr$··à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àÔ2ˆAÔ(Ú  Ú0Ú  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0¸ (#¸ (#à(ŒU$¸¸à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àÔ2ˆAÔ(Ú  ÚaÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0h(#(#à(Ÿ@Æ$¹¹à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àÔ2ˆAÔ(Ú  ÚÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0Àh(#h(#à(³ýt$ººà0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àà0Àh(#h(#àÔ2ˆAÔÚ  Ú0Ú  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0À(#À(#à(Çñû$»»à0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#àà0¸ (#¸ (#àà0h(#(#àà0Àh(#h(#àà0À(#À(#àÔ2ˆAÔÚ  ÚaÚ  Ú)Ô3  Ôà0p(#(#à€-‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒþ,!ÝÔ€XÏÂXXXÔÝ  ݛҰÒÑTR[  AØ'ÿ Legal3Ø' AØ'ÿ Legalÿ3Ø'TÑÓ  Óò òÓÓÑ7€ÏÂXdædÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ€ OY Ññpñœñpññzññpñßr€*<,(j 8` `€€@Eȱ` 8ttxP°ð  rßñpññzññzñßr€*<,(j 8` `€€@Eȱ` 8ttxP°ð  rßñzññpñ›ñpñIN€THE€COURT€OF€CRIMINAL€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEEÌAT€NASHVILLEÌFEBRUARY€1999€SESSIONÌó óÌÌÓ  Óò òÓÓCHARLES€EDWARD€MEEKS,ó óà À àà  à)Ð Ð  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)Ìà ` àà ¸ àAppellant,à h àà À àà  à)€€€€€€ò òC.C.A.€No.€01C01„9807„CC„00295ó óÐ ¢ò  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)Ìvs.à ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)€€€€€€ò òGrundy€Countyó óÐ tÄ  Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)Ìò òSTATE€OF€TENNESSEE,à h àà À àà  àó ó)€€€€€€ò òHon.€Thomas€W.€Graham,€Judgeó óÐ F– Ðò òà ` àà ¸ àó óà  àà h àà À àà  à)Ð 2‚ Ðà ` àà ¸ àAppellee.à h àà À àà  à)€€€€€€ò ò(First€Degree€Murder)ó óÐ h Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à)ÌÌFOR€THE€APPELLANT:à h àà À àà  à€€€€€€€FOR€THE€APPELLEE:Ð Ð  ÐÌDOUGLAS€œTRANT›à  àà h àà À àà  à€€€€€€€JOHN€KNOX€WALKUPÐ œì ÐRiverview€Tower,€Suite€1502à À àà  à€€€€€€€Attorney€General€&€ReporterÐ ‚Ò Ð900€S.€Gay€StreetÌKnoxville,€TN€œ37902€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€KIM€R.€HELPERÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à€€€€€€€Assistant€Attorney€GeneralÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à€€€€€€€425€Fifth€Avenue€NorthÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àñhñ€€€€€€€ñhññiññhñ€NñhññiññjñNashville,€TNñjññkññjñ€ñjññkññjñ€3ñjññlñ7243„0493ñlñÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  à›à h àà À àà  à€€€€€€€J.€MICHAEL€TAYLORÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€District€Attorney€GeneralÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à€€€€€€€Third€&€Market€StreetsÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À à€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Dayton,€TN€37321ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à€€€€€€€THOMAS€D.€HEMBREEÌà ` à€€€€€€€à ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à€€€€€€€Asst.€District€AttorneyÐ 0&€!% Ðà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à€€€€€€€Lawyers€BuildingÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Jasper,€TN€37347ÌÌÌÌÌœÌÌ›ÌÌOPINION€FILED:€_____________ÌÌò òÌAFFIRMEDÌÌÌJAMES€CURWOOD€WITT,€JR.,€JUDGEó óÐ Ž5Þ06 ÐÌÌÌÌÌœÌñoñÌñoññnñÌñnññoñ›ñoññmñ̛̛Ìñmñ›Ó  Óò òOPINIONÐ Þ;.7=Ç ÐÓ  ÓÓÓó óÌà ` àà ¸ àThe€petitioner,€Charles€Edward€Meeks,€appeals€the€Grundy€CountyÏCircuit€Courtððs€dismissal€of€his€petition€for€post„conviction€relief.€€He€alleges€theÏineffective€assistance€of€trial€counsel€in€two€respects.€€First,€he€alleges€that€trialÏcounsel€was€ineffective€in€failing€to€prepare€and€present€evidence€at€trial€of€theÏdefendantððs€lack€of€capacity€for€intent€to€commit€œmurder€and€in€failing€to€seek€a€juryÏinstruction€regarding€such€ð ðdiminished€capacity.ð𛀀Second,€he€asserts€trial€counselÏwas€ineffective€because€he€declined€to€make€an€opening€statement€to€the€jury.€ÏAfter€hearing€oral€argument€and€reviewing€the€record€and€the€applicable€law,€weÏaffirm€the€judgment€of€the€lower€court.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àThe€œpetitioner›€was€convicted€on€October€6,€œ1994›€œfor›€œthe€February€26,Ï1994›€first€degree€murder€of€Charles€Coffelt,€the€œpetitionerððs›€œbrother„in„law.€€HeÏreceived€a€life€sentence.€€His›€conviction€was€affirmed€by€this€court,€and€hisÏapplication€for€permission€to€appeal€to€the€supreme€court€was€denied.€€òòSeeóóòòStateÐ Ø( Ðv.€Charles€Edward€Meeksóó,€No.€01C01„9506„CC„00170€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Nashville,Ð ¤ô ÐNov.€21,1995),€òòpermóó.€òòappóó.€òòdeniedóó€(Tenn.€May€6,€1996).Ð p!À  ÐÌà ` àà ¸ àThe€following€excerpt€from€this€courtððs€opinion€in€the€direct€appeal€ofÏœthe€petitionerððs›€conviction€discloses€pertinent€factual€background€in€the€case.ÌÒ` ÒÒ°ÒÓÓIn€January,€1994,€the€defendant€was€shot€in€the€forehead€with€a€.22Ïcaliber€bullet.€€The€bullet€lodged€in€his€right€frontal€sinus€and€remainedÏthere€for€several€months.€€On€February€19,€1994,€the€defendant€wasÏadmitted€to€the€hospital€to€have€an€abscess€treated€that€had€formedÏaround€the€wound.€€He€was€discharged€from€the€hospital€onÏWednesday,€February€23,€1994,€and€was€given€two€Percocets€and€aÏprescription€for€antibiotics.€€Percocet€is€a€Schedule€II€drug€used€forÏmoderate€pain.ÌÌOn€Saturday,€February€26,€1994,€the€defendant€was€suffering€from€aÏsevere€headache.€€Rose€Meeks,€the€defendantððs€ex„wife,€called€aÏdoctor€at€the€hospital€where€the€defendant€had€been€treated,€whoÏprescribed€Percocet€for€the€defendantððs€pain.€€At€about€4:00€p.m.,€Ms.ÏMeeks€drove€the€defendant€to€the€hospital€where€she€picked€up€theÏprescription.€€Ms.€Meeks€then€drove€to€a€pharmacy€and€had€theÏprescription€filled.€€Between€6:00€and€8:30€p.m.,€she€gave€the€paperÏbag€containing€the€prescription€bottle€to€the€defendant,€whoÏimmediately€took€ð ðsomeðð€of€the€drug.€€On€the€way€home€from€theÏhospital,€Ms.€Meeks€stopped€at€a€liquor€store€and€the€defendantÏpurchased€some€liquor.Ð ²95; ÐÌAfter€arriving€home€at€approximately€10:30€p.m.,€the€defendantÏprepared€a€mixed€drink€for€himself€and€Ms.€Meeks.€€He€also€tookÏsome€more€Percocet.€€The€defendant€testified€that€he€had€taken€aÏtotal€of€four€to€five€Percocets€that€day.€€Shortly€after€they€arrivedÏhome,€Ms.€Meeks€invited€Ann€Coffelt€and€the€victim,€Charles€Coffelt,Ïover€for€a€visit.€€Upon€the€Coffeltsðð€arrival€between€11:00€and€11:30Ïp.m.,€the€defendant€mixed€himself€another€drink€and€also€fixed€one€forÏthe€victim.€€The€defendant€testified€that€he€œhad€had›€no€other€alcoholÏthat€day.ÌÌAfter€visiting€for€a€few€minutes,€the€defendant€and€the€victim€beganÏarguing.€€Although€the€exact€sequence€of€events€was€disputed€at€trial,Ïthe€defendant€testified€that€the€victim€had€struck€him€with€his€fist€ð ðrightÏbetween€the€eyes.ðð€€He€testified€that,€after€hitting€him,€the€victimÏð ðcame€back€at€me€again€with€another€right,ðð€at€which€point€theÏdefendant€produced€a€pistol€and€shot€the€victim€twice.€€Although€theÏdefendant€subsequently€administered€CPR€to€the€victim,€Mr.€CoffeltÏdied€a€short€time€later.€€The€defendant€was€taken€into€police€custodyÏat€approximately€11:45€p.m.,€and€gave€a€sworn€statement€atÏapproximately€2:00€a.m.€on€February€27,€1994.€€The€TBI€agent€whoÏtook€the€statement€testified€that€the€defendant€was€ð ðvery€nervousðð€butÏð ðsober.ðð€€ÌÌThe€defendant€pled€not€guilty€to€first„degree€murder€and€relied€on€self„¼defense.€€At€trial,€the€defendantððs€counsel€advised€the€court€that€heÏwould€be€offering€proof€on€the€issue€of€voluntary€intoxication.€€At€theÏconclusion€of€closing€arguments,€defense€counsel€requested€a€juryÏinstruction€on€the€defense€of€involuntary€œintoxication.›€€The€trial€courtÏdenied€this€request,€finding€that€there€was€ð ðnot€sufficient€evidence€inÏthe€record€to€warrant€that€charge.ðð€€The€trial€court€did,€however,Ïcharge€the€jury€with€the€law€on€voluntary€intoxication.€.€.€.€TheÏdefendant€testified€that,€on€the€day€he€shot€the€victim,€he€hadÏintroduced€both€alcohol€and€Percocet€into€his€body.€€The€surgicalÏresident€who€treated€the€defendantððs€abscess€testified€that€the€sideÏeffects€of€Percocet€include€light„œheadedness›,€dizziness,€andÏsleepiness,€and€that€it€produces€results€similar€to€intoxication.€€HeÏfurther€testified€that€alcohol€would€magnify€the€effects€of€Percocet.€ÏThe€defendant€testified€that€he€had€gotten€ð ða€little€dizzyðð€right€beforeÏthe€victim€allegedly€hit€him.ÌÌÒ` ÒÒ°ÒÓÓÌà ` àà ¸ àThe€post„conviction€court€conducted€an€evidentiary€hearing.€€TrialÏcounsel€testified€that€he€relied€upon€the€theories€of€self„defense€and€intoxication.€ÏHe€was€aware€that€the€œpetitioner›€had€a€bullet€lodged€in€his€sinus€cavity€and€that€heÏwas€under€the€influence€of€both€prescribed€pain€medication€and€alcohol.€€CounselÏconsidered€an€insanity€defense€but€withdrew€it€after€receiving€a€psychological€reportÏthat€indicated€the€œpetitionerððs›€competency.€€As€to€his€failure€to€make€an€openingÐ 09€48 Ðargument,€he€stated€(1)€that€he€did€not€wish€to€alert€the€state€to€prepare€rebuttal€asÏto€any€issues€the€state€may€have€overlooked€and€(2)€that€in€the€past€he€hadÏexperienced€regret€in€making€opening€statements€when€he€had€difficulty€backingÏthem€up€with€proof.€€On€this€last€point,€he€stated€that€he€did€not€know€at€theÏbeginning€of€the€trial€whether€the€œpetitionerððs›€wife€would€testify€and€that,€in€light€ofÏthis€uncertainty,€he€did€not€know€what€he€could€prove.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àThe€œpetitioner›€called€as€an€expert€witness€Dr.€Pamela€Auble,€a€clinical€Ïneuropsychologist.€She€œhad€examined›€the€trial€transcript,€the€Erlanger€HospitalÏreports€from€the€defendantððs€February€1994€treatment,€various€letters€and€notesÏpertaining€€to€the€case,€and€the€defendantððs€pretrial€statement.€€On€August€15,€1996,Ïshe€spent€five€hours€at€Southeast€Tennessee€Regional€Correctional€FacilityÏinterviewing€the€œpetitioner›€and€administering€neuropsychological€and€personalityÏtests€to€him.€€She€attributed€the€defendantððs€actions€in€shooting€Coffelt€to€aÏcombination€of€factors.€€She€cited€two€long„term€factors€„„€a€low€IQ€in€the€borderlineÏretarded€range€and€a€ð ðpretty€low€self€esteem.ðð€€As€to€the€latter€factor,€she€opinedÏthat€the€œpetitioner›€ð ðtends€to€be€tense€and€anxious€and€he€gets€easily€upset€byÏanything€that€he€perceives€as€criticism.ðð€€She€stated€that€these€two€long„term€factorsÏcombined€with€other€factors€of€more€recent€derivation.€€She€referred€to€theÏœpetitionerððs›€January€1994€gunshot€injury€and,€noting€that€œthe€petitionerððs›€medicalÏrecords€indicated€œthe€defendant€had€a›€seizure€œwhile€in›€the€hospital,€she€opined€thatÏð ðhe€probably€had€œat›€least€like€a€concussion.ðð€€She€testified€that€ð ðup€to€a€year€afterÏa€concussion€people€exhibit€signs€of€poor€reasoning€and€memory,€theyððre€kind€ofÏaddled.€.€.€.€[œT]he›€post€concussion€syndrome€would€be€something€that€would€haveÏbeen€influencing€his€behavior€at€the€time€of€the€killing.ðð€€She€opined€that€theÏdefendantððs€low€mental€functioning€would€be€worsened€by€the€ð ðpost€concussionÏsyndrome.ðð€€Further,€she€cited€the€headache€pain€the€defendant€was€experiencingÏon€the€night€of€the€shooting€and€said,€ð ðYour€being€in€pain€makes€you€perceive€theÏworld€differently.€€You€donððt€reason€about€things€as€well,€you€donððt€think€as€clearly,Ð 09€48 Мyouððre›€more€easily€upset.ðð€€Another€contributing€factor€was€the€combination€ofÏexcessive€amounts€of€Percocet€pain€medication€and€alcohol€which€would€haveÏð ðfurther€compromised€or€effected€[sic]€his€reasoning,€his€memory,€his€ability€to€thinkÏabout€situations€to€control€himself,€and€to€otherwise€act€in€a€reasonable€fashion.ðð€ÏFinally,€Dr.€Auble€opined€that€the€œpetitionerððs›€emotional€stress€at€the€time€of€theÏshooting€was€a€contributing€factor.€€She€referred€to€his€recent€head€injury,€hisÏmarital€difficulty,€and€the€blow€to€his€head€from€Coffeltððs€fist.€€When€asked€by€post„¼conviction€counsel€whether€she€had€an€opinion€as€to€the€œpetitionerððs›€capacity€toÏform€specific€intent€to€shoot€Coffelt,€she€responded,€ð ðGiven€all€the€things€that€wereÏgoing€on€with€him€at€that€time,€and€his€state€of€mind,€it€is€my€opinion€that€he€did€notÏhave€the€capacity€to€form€a€specific€intent,€a€cool,€premeditation€at€that€time.ðð€€ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àOn€cross„examination,€Dr.€Auble€agreed€with€the€pretrialÏdeterminations€that€the€defendant€was€competent€and€that€an€insanity€defenseÏcould€not€have€been€supported.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àThe€œpetitioner›€testified€at€the€hearing.€€He€said,€ð ðMr.€Coffelt€and€meÏboth€was€drunk€and€Iððm€sure€that€if€he€hadnððt€a€been€drinking€he€never€would€haveÏhit€me,€and€Iððm€sure€that€if€I€hadnððt€a€been€drinking€and€on€medication€I€would€notÏhave€done€what€I€done.ðð€€Despite€this€testimony,€he€maintained€that€he€did€notÏtestify€truthfully€at€trial.€€He€said€he€did€not€remember€what€happened€on€the€nightÏof€the€shooting€and€that€he€testified€according€to€his€counselððs€instructions.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àIn€dismissing€the€petition,€the€post„conviction€court€found€that,€if€theÏfailure€to€present€ð ðdiminished€capacityðð€evidence€was€deficient€performance€ofÏcounsel,€it€was€not€prejudicial.€€The€court€remarked€that€the€jury€was€aware€of€theÏpetitionerððs€existing€head€injury,€his€use€of€Percocet€and€alcohol€and€their€effects,Ïand€the€petitionerððs€illiteracy.€€The€judge€commented€that€the€jury€received€pertinentÏinformation€about€ð ðdiminished€capacityðð€œthrough›€the€voluntary€intoxication€instructionÐ 09€48 Ðand€through€the€general€instructions€on€the€burden€of€proof.€€The€court€said€that€theÏpretrial€mental€examination€did€not€support€an€insanity€defense€and€did€not€alertÏcounsel€to€a€ð ðdiminished€capacityðð€claim.€€The€court€found€the€petitioner€to€be€ð ðlessÏthan€credibleðð€as€a€witness.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àAs€to€the€failure€to€make€an€opening€statement,€the€lower€court€ruledÏthat€the€issue€provided€no€basis€for€post„conviction€relief€because€trial€counselÏmade€a€tactical€decision€to€waive€the€œstatement.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àFor€post„conviction€petitions€filed€after€May€10,€1995,€ð ð[t]he€petitionerÏshall€have€the€burden€of€proving€the€allegations€of€fact€by€clear€and€convincingÏevidence.ðð€€Tenn.€Ann.€Code€ðð€40„39„210(f)€(1997).€€The€post„conviction€courtððsÏfindings€of€fact€are€afforded€ð ðthe€weight€of€a€jury€verdict€and€are€conclusive€onÏappeal€unless€the€evidence€in€the€record€preponderates€against€those€findings.ðð€ÏòòState€v.€Henleyóó,€960€S.W.2d€572,€578€(Tenn.€1997),€òòcertóó.€òòdeniedó󀄀„€„€U.S.€„€„€„€,€119Ð ð@ ÐS.€Ct.€82€(1998).€As€a€appellate€court,€we€do€not€reweigh€or€reevaluate€theÏevidence,€nor€do€we€ð ðsubstitute€our€inferences€for€those€drawn€by€the€trial€judge.ðð€ÏòòIdóó.€at€579.€€The€burden€is€on€the€appellant€to€demonstrate€that€the€evidenceÐ $à" Ðpreponderates€against€the€post„conviction€courtððs€findings.€€òòIdóó.€Ð p&À!$ ÐÌÓ  Óò òI.ó óÐ 0*€%( ÐÓ  Óà ` àà ¸ àThe›€petitioner€alleges€that€trial€counsel€was€ineffective€because€heÏfailed€to€use€proof€of€the€defendantððs€ð ðdiminished€capacityðð€to€intend€to€kill.œ×ƒ×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú1Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×›€œ€€Ð ð-@), Ðð ðDiminished€capacityðð€is€not€a€òòdefenseóó€in€Tennessee.€€òòState€v.€Phippsóó,€883€S.W.2dÐ Ð/ +. Ð138,€149€(Tenn.€1994).€›€œOur€supreme€court€has€discouraged€the€use€of€the€phrase›Ð °1-0 Ðð ðdiminished€œcapacityð𛀜because€it€poorly€reflects€the€proper€use€of€the€evidence›€toÏð ðœnegate›€the€existence€of€the€culpable€mental€state€required€to€establish€the€criminalÏoffense.ðð€€òòState€v.€Hallóó,€958€S.W.2d€679,€690€(Tenn.€œ1997),€òòcertóó.€òòdeniedóó,€„€„€„€U.S.€„Ð pÀ Є€„€118€S.€Ct.€2348€(1998).€In€the€present€case,€the€petitioner€claims€trial€counselÏwas€remiss€in€not€presenting€certain€evidence€that€would€negate€the€intent€orÏpremeditation€and€deliberation€elements€of€first€degree€murder.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àWe€affirm€the€trial€courtððs€denial€of€post„conviction€relief€on€this€issue,Ïalthough€we€base€our€decision€on€different€grounds€than€the€trial€court€used.€€TheÏtrial€court€found€that,€if€trial€counsel€performed€deficiently,€the€record€established€noÏprejudice.€€On€the€other€hand,€we€hold€that€the€record€fails€to€establish€deficientÏperformance.€€›ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àWhen€a€defendant€uses€expert€psychiatric€testimony€to€prove€he€orÏshe€lacked€the€capacity€to€intend€the€crime,€ð ðthe€psychiatric€testimony€mustÏdemonstrate€that€the€defendantððs€inability€to€form€the€requisite€culpable€mental€stateÏwas€the€product€of€a€òòmentalóó€òòdiseaseóó€òòoróó€òòdefectóó,€not€just€a€particular€emotional€stateÐ °"  Ðor€mental€condition.ðð€€òòHallóó,€œ958€S.W.2d€at›€œ690€(emphasis€added).›€€In€òòHallóó,€theÐ $à" Ðdefendant€asserted€trial€court€error€in€disallowing€his€psychiatric€expert€to€testifyÏabout€his€ð ðdiminished€capacityðð€to€intend€œmurder.›€€The€defense€wanted€to€prove€thatÏHallððs€ð ðconsumption€of€alcohol€would€have€had€[an€œeffect]›€on€him€with€his€type€ofÏœpersonalityðð›€and€that€he€was€under€ð ðemotional€distress€and€stress.ðð€€òòIdóó.€At€theÐ ,`'* Ðsentencing€hearing,€the€expert€testified€Hall€had€ð ða€borderline€personality€disorderÏand€that€such€people€could€have€brief€episodes€of€rage€during€ððtemporary€states€of€Ïmental€illness.ðððð€òòIdóó.€at€691.€€Our€supreme€court€rejected€Hallððs€claim€and€held€thatÐ °1-0 Мð ð[t]hough›€expert€testimony€is€admissible€to€show€that€because€of€a€mental€diseaseÏor€defect,€a€defendant€lacked€the€capacity€to€form€œthe›€mental€state€required€toÏconstitute€the€offense.€.€.€,€the€testimony€in€this€case€did€not€œmeet›€that€standard.ðð€Ð P7 26 ÐòòIdóó.€at€692.Ð 09€48 Їà ` àà ¸ àThe€evidence€proposed€by€Hall€failed€in€three€respects.€€First,€theÏexpert€did€not€propose€to€testify€that€Hall€ð ðlacked€the€capacity€to€premeditate€andÏdeliberate€the€killing€because€of€a€mental€disease€or€defect.ðð€€òòIdóó.€at€691.€€Second,Ð pÀ Ðthe€expert€spoke€only€abstractly€and€generally€about€typical€persons€with€personalityÏtypes€similar€to€Hallððs€type,€instead€of€discussing€ð ðthe€capacity€of€the€particularÏdefendant€on€trial.ðð€€òòIdóó.€€Third,€the€ð ðpersonality€type€and€character€traits€which€[theÐ `  Ðexpert]€gleaned€from€test€results€and€a€single€three€hour€interviewðð€do€not€equateÏto€proof€of€ð ða€defendantððs€òòcapacityóó€to€form€the€mental€intent.ðð€€òòIdóó.€€œ(italics›€in€œoriginal).›€Ð Ð  ÐThe€court€quoted€with€approval€Judge€Tiptonððs€comment€that€œÌÓÓà ` àThe›€mere€fact€that€one€is€more€apt,€by€personality€type,€to€become€emotionalÏœà ` àin›€response€to€a€particular€stimulus€does€not€provide€a€means€for€that€person€œ¼à ` àto›€be€absolved€from€the€same€responsibility€to€which€the€law€holds€another€œ¼à ` àwho›€might€be€less€apt€to€respond€as€passionately€to€the€same€stimulus.€€If€œ¼à ` àit›€did,€then€each€person€would€be€the€law€unto€himself€or€herself€based€solelyÏœà ` àupon›€his€or€her€particular€personality€œmakeup.ÌÌÓÓòòIdóó.›€at€œ692›€œ(quoting›€òòState€v.€Leroy€Hall,€Jr.óó,€œNo.€03C01„9303„CR„00065,›€slip€op.€œatÐ  p Ð18€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€Dec.€30,€1996)).›€€ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àIn€the€present€case,€we€are€unable€to€conclude€that€the€testimony€ofÏDr.€œAuble€would€be€admissible€under›€the€standard€of€òòHallóó.€€Although€Dr.€Auble€didÐ  #ð! Ðopine€that€the€petitioner€lacked€the€capacity€to€specifically€intend€or€to€premeditateÏand€deliberate€the€killing,€she€did€not€opine€that€his€incapacity€was€because€of€aÏmental€disease€or€defect.€€ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àœFurthermore,€we€cannot€glean€from€the€record€that€any€suchÏincapacity€is€based€on€mental€disease€or€defect.€€Dr.›€Auble€based€her€finding€ofÏincapacity€on€a€combination€of€factors.€€However,€severe€headache€pain,€stressÏover€marital€discord,€low€self„esteem,€and€antipathy€to€criticism€are€either€episodicÏin€nature,€œmanifestations›€of€emotional€responses,€or€œsimply›€suggestive€ofÏpersonality€type.€€As€œsuch,›€these€factors€do€not€implicate€mental€disease€or€defect.€ÏòòSeeóó€òòHallóó,€958€S.W.2d€at€691„92.€€Voluntary€intoxication,€though€a€factor€cited€by€Dr.Ð @837 ÐAuble,€was€raised€at€trial€and€explained€to€the€jury.€€The€remaining€factors€are€(1)Ð  :p59 Ðthe€post€concussion€syndrome€and€(2)€the€defendantððs€low€IQ.€€We€discuss€theseÏfactors€in€more€detail.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àDr.€Aubleððs€testimony€about€ð ðpost€concussion€syndromeðð€was€basedÏupon€a€reference€in€a€hospital€record€that€the€petitioner€had€a€seizure,€ð ðand€so€heÐ 0 € Ðòòprobablyóó€had€at€least€òòlikeóó€òòaóóòòconcussionóó.ðð€€(Emphasis€added.)€€The€œfacts€underlying›Ð `  Мthe›€opinion€that€the€petitioner€actually€sustained€a€concussion€œindicate›€a€lack€ofÏœtrustworthiness.›€œòòSeeóó›Tenn.€R.€Evid.€703.€œ€Had€this€evidence€been€presented,€the€›Ð Ð  Мtrial›€court€œwould€have€been›€within€its€discretion€œin›€œð ðdisallow[ing]›€testimony€in€theÏform€of€[such]€an€opinion€or€inference.ðð€€òòIdóó.€€Additionally,€the€opinion€about€ð ðpostÐ à Ðconcussion€syndromeðð€relates€to€ð ðpeople€[who]€exhibit€signs€of€poor€reasoning€andÏmemoryðð€up€to€a€year€after€a€œconcussion.€€ð ðThey›,ðð€Dr.€Auble€said,€ð ðdonððt€think€asÏclearly€as€they€used€to.ðð€€Based€upon€these€findings,€she€opined€that€postÏconcussion€syndrome€would€be€œð ðsomething›€that€would€have€been€influencing€hisÏœbehaviorðð›€three€years€earlier€when€the€shooting€occurred.€€This€testimony€isÏreminiscent€of€the€proposed€expert€testimony€in€òòHallóó.€€Generalizations€about€typicalÐ Ð  Ðreactions€are€ð ðnot€relevant€to€the€capacity€of€the€particular€defendant€on€trial.ðð€€òòHallóó,Ð °"  Ð958€S.W.2d€at€œ691.€€From›€all€of€the€above,€we€conclude€Dr.€Aubleððs€testimony€œabout›Ïð ðpost€concussion€œsyndromeðð€failed€to€establish€an€incapacity€that€was€derived€fromÏmental›€disease€or€defect.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àNext,€we€assess€Dr.€Aubleððs€testimony€about€the€petitionerððs€ð ðlow€IQÏ.€.€.€in€the€borderline€retarded€œrange.ðð€€We€have€reviewed€the€trial€record€from€theÏdefendantððs€direct€appeal€and€agree€that€the€jury€did€not€hear€any€evidence€aboutÏthe€defendantððs€low€IQ.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àFirst,›€we€note€that€the€terms€ð ðmental€diseaseðð€and€ð ðmental€defectðð€areÏâ âphrases€of€legal€import€and€do€not€have€œcurrency€in›€modern€psychologicalÐ P7 26 Ðparlance.œñPñ׃ ×ñPññPñ׃×ñPñÝ ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú2Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×›€€Therefore,€we€look€to€legal€scholarship€to€determine€whether€mentalÐ ° Ðâ âretardation€is€either€a€mental€disease€or€mental€defect.€€œÌÌ›à ` àà ¸ àOur€legislature€has€defined€ð ðmental€diseases€or€defectðð€œas€follows:›€ÌÓÓà ` àInsanity€€„€œ(a)€Insanity€is€a€defense€to€prosecution€if,€at€the€time€of€such€¼à ` àconduct,€as€a€result€of€mental€disease€or€defect,€the€person€lacked€¼à ` àsubstantial€capacity€either€to€appreciate€the€wrongfulness€of€the€personððs€¼à ` àconduct€or€to€conform€that€conduct€to€the€requirements€of€law.ñRñÌñRññTññSñ10ñSññTñà Ð àÐ P  Ðà ` àà ¸ à(b)›€As€used€in€this€section,€ð ðmental€disease€or€defectðð€does€not€includeÏœà ` àany›€œabnormality›€manifested€only€by€repeated€criminal€or€otherwise€antisocial€œ¼à ` àconduct.›€œÌÌTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€39„11„501€(1991)€(amended€1995)ÌÌ›€à ` àDefinitions€œ„€The€following€definitions€apply€in€[sex€offenses]€unless€the€Ð à Ðà ` àcontext€otherwise€requires:€ÌÌà ` à(3)€€ð ðMentally€defectiveðð›€means€that€a€person€suffers€from€a€mental€disease€œ¼à ` àor›€defect€œwhich€renders›€that€person€temporarily€or€permanently€incapable€of€œ¼à ` àappraising›€œthe€nature›€of€such€personððs€conduct.€€œÌÌÓÓTenn.›€Code€Ann.€ðð€œ39„13„501(1991€)€(amended€1995).€€This›€court€has€approvedÏa€jury€charge€as€a€correct€statement€of€the€law€which€defined€ð ðmental€disease€orÏdefectðð€as€ð ðany€abnormal€condition€of€a€mind€which€substantially€œaffects›€mental€orÏemotional€processes€and€impairs€the€behavior€controls.ðð€€òòState€v.€Maxóó,€714€S.W.2dÐ À! Ð289,€295€(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€1986).€€ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àThese€definitions€do€not€exclude€mental€retardation€as€a€form€ofÏð ðmental€disease€or€œdefect.ðð€€In€at€least€one€case,€we€have€recognized€the€legitimacyÏof€mental€retardation€as€a€facet€of€an€insanity€claim.€€òòState›€v.€Haunóó,€695€S.W.2d€546Ð  +p&) Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.€œ1985).€€In€òòHaunóó,›€this€court€held€that€the€trial€court€erred€inÐ -P(+ Ðdisallowing€defense€proof€œthat€Haun,€as›€a€premature€infant,€œsuffered›€ð ðan€hypoxicÏepisode,€depriving€the€infant€of€oxygen€and€resulting€in€brain€damage.ðð€€òòHaunóó,€714Ð À0,/ ÐS.W.2d€at€549.€€Ð  2ð-1 ÐÑ OY ÑѰ°ÑÑ  ÑÌà ` àà ¸ àIn€œòòPenry›€v.€Lynaughóó,€492€U.S.€302,€109€S.€Ct.€2934€(1989),€theÐ à ÐSupreme€Court€considered€the€constitutionality€of€subjecting€mentally„retardedÏdefendants€to€capital€punishment,€especially€in€light€of€that€courtððs€earlier€ruling€thatÏinsane€persons€may€not€receive€the€death€œpenalty.€€òòIdóó.€at€334,€109€S.€Ct.€at€2955€Ð 0 € Ð(citing›€òòFord€v.€Wainwrightóó,€477€U.S.€œ399,›€410,€106€S.€Ct.€2595,€2603€œ(1986)).›€€In€œthe›Ð `  Ðcontext€of€whether€the€death€penalty€could€be€imposed,€the€court€examined€theÏnature€of€mental€retardation€œòòvis„a„visóó›€insanity.€€œThe€court›€said,€ð ðIt€was€well€settledÐ Ð  Ðat€common€law€that€ððidiots,ðð€together€with€ððlunatics,ðð€were€not€subject€to€punishmentÏfor€criminal€acts€.€.€.€.ðð€€œòòIdóó.›€at€331,€109€S.€Ct.€at€2953.€€Idiocy,€the€court€said,€was€ð ðððaÐ à Ðòòdefectóóòòofóó€òòunderstandingóó€from€the€moment€of€birth.ðððð€òòIdóó.€€€œ(emphasis›€œadded).›€€It€wasÐ pÀ Ða€term€ð ðgenerally€used€to€describe€persons€who€had€a€total€lack€of€reason€orÏunderstanding,€or€an€inability€to€distinguish€between€good€and€evil.ðð€€œòòIdóó.€at›€331„32,Ð 0€ Ð109€S.€Ct.€at€2954.€€This€common€law€aversion€to€punishing€idiots€or€lunatics€wasÏthe€matrix€of€the€insanity€defense,€ð ðwhich€today€includes€ððmental€defectðð€as€well€asÏððmental€diseaseðð€as€part€of€the€legal€definition€of€insanity,ðð€œñPñòòóóñPñand›€the€ð ðnotionðð€of€idiocyÏbears€some€relation€to€the€modern€definition€of€mental€retardation.ðð€€œòòIdóó.€at€332,€109Ð °"  ÐS.€Ct.€at€2954.€€However,›€the€court€pointed€out,€the€common€law€aversion€toÏpunishing€ð ðidiotsðð€was€limited€ð ðto€persons€of€òòsuchóó€òòsevereóó€òòdisabilityóó€that€they€lackedÐ p&À!$ Ðòòtheóó€òòreasoningóó€òòcapacityóó€òòtoóó€òòformóó€òòcriminalóó€òòintentóó€òòoróó€òòtoóó€òòunderstandóó€òòtheóó€òòdifferenceóóÐ P( #& Ðòòbetweenóó€òògoodóó€òòandóó€œòòevilóó.ðð€›€œòòIdóó.›€at€333,€109€S.€Ct.€at€2954€(emphasis€added).€€ð ðIdiocyððÐ 0*€%( Ðreferred€to€ð ðthe€most€retarded€of€persons,€corresponding€to€what€is€called€ððprofoundððÏand€ððsevereðð€retardation€today.ðð€€òòIdóó.€œThe›€œòòPenryóó›€court€concluded€that€mentalÐ ð-@), Ðretardation€alone,€œð ðapart›€from€any€individualized€consideration€of€the€[defendantððs]Ïpersonal€responsibility,ðð€does€not€exempt€a€defendant€from€criminal€sanctions,Ïincluding€the€death€penalty.€€œòòIdóó.€at›€340,€109€S.€Ct.€œat›€œ2958.׃×Ý ƒ#ÃÝòòÚ  Ú3Ú  ÚóóÝ  Ý×  ×€€Ð 3à.2 Їà ` àà ¸ àMental›€retardation€is€defined€as:ÌÒ` ÒÒ°ÒÓÓA.€€Significant€subaverage€intellectual€functioning:€an€IQ€ofÏapproximately€70€or€below€on€an€individually€administered€IQ€test€.€.Ï.€[and]€ÌB.€€Concurrent€deficits€or€impairments€in€present€adaptive€functioningÏ(i.e.,€the€personððs€effectiveness€in€meeting€the€standards€expected€forÏhis€or€her€age€by€his€or€her€cultural€group)€in€at€least€two€of€theÏfollowing€areas:€communication,€self„care,€home€living,Ïsocial/interpersonal€skills,€use€of€community€resources,€self„direction,Ïfunctional€academic€skills,€work,€leisure,€health,€and€safety€[and]ÌC.€€The€onset€is€before€age€18€years.ÌÌÒ` ÒÒ°ÒÓÓœAmerican€Psychiatric€Assððn,€Diagnostic€and€Statistical€Manual€of€Mental€Disorders,ÏNumber€4,€Diagnostic›€Criteria€œ50›€œ(1995).›€€IQ€scores€from€approximately€70€downÏto€50„55€suggest€mild€retardation;€50„55€down€to€35„40,€moderate€mentalÏretardation;€35„40€down€to€20„25,€severe€mental€retardation;€and€below€20„25,Ïprofound€mental€retardation.€€òòIdóó.Ð `° ÐÌà ` àà ¸ àDr.€Auble€characterized€the€petitioner€as€borderline€mentally€retarded.ÏShe€did€not€specify€the€adaptive€functioning€areas€in€which€she€found€him€deficient,Ïœbut›€his€illiteracy€may€indicate€a€deficiency€in€ð ðfunctional€academic€skills.ðð€€ThatÐ à0 Ðdeficiency€along€with,€for€instance,€a€deficiency€in€œcommunication›€and€an€IQ€scoreÏof€70€œapparently€would›€qualify€the€petitioner€as€œborderline›€mentally€retarded.€€It€canÏbe€seen€readily€that€such€a€classification€does€not€mean€the€petitioner€is€incapableÏof€conducting€many€life€activities.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àIn€œòòPenryóó,›€the€defendantððs€IQ€was€between€50€and€63,€and€œat›€22€yearsÐ `  Ðof€age,€œhe€was›€characterized€as€having€the€mental€age€of€a€6€ðð„year„old€person.€Ïœð ðPenryððs›€social€maturity,€or€ability€to€function€in€the€world,€was€that€of€a€9€or€10„year„¼old.ðð€€œòòPenryóó,›€492€U.S.€at€307„08,€109€S.€Ct.€at€2941.€€Nevertheless,€the€SupremeÐ ° ÐCourt€observed€that€œPenry›€was€found€competent€to€stand€trial,€and€the€high€courtÏheld€that€œPenry›€was€subject€to€the€ultimate€criminal€œsanction.€€In€effect,€he€was€notÏhampered€by€any€ð ðmental€disease€or€defect.ðð€€òòIdóó.€at€338„40,€109€S.€Ct.€at€2957„58;Ð P  Ðòòaccordó󀛀œòòState›€v.€œLaneyóó,›€654€S.W.2d€383€(Tenn.€œ1983)€(defendant€diagnosed€asÐ 0€ Ðð ðborderline€mentally€retardedðð€with€IQ€of€72€subject€to€death€penalty).›€€ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àIn€the€present€case,€Dr.€Auble€concurred€in€the€pretrial€findings€thatÏthe€petitioner€was€competent€to€stand€trial€and€was€not€a€candidate€for€an€insanityÏdefense.€€œNothing€in€the€record€suggests€that€the€petitioner€lacked€the€ð ðcapacity€toÏappreciate€the€wrongfulness€of€[his]€actions.ðð€€òòSeeóóòòPenryóó,›€492€U.S.€at€333,€109€S.Ð p&À!$ ÐCt.€at€2954.€€Therefore,€the€record€fails€to€establish€œthat,€because€of€mental€diseaseÏor€defect,›€the€petitioner€lacked€the€capacity€to€intend€œthe›€œkilling.›ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àWe€have€considered€whether€the€record€establishes€the€requiredÏmental€incapacity€based€upon€the€aggregate€of€the€various€factors.€€Dr.€AubleÏtestified€that€some€of€the€factors€exacerbated€the€others.€€However,€her€opinion€ofÏincapacity€is€in€no€way€grounded€œupon›€the€findings€and€exposition€of€mental€diseaseÏor€œdefect.€€Without€such€a€foundation,€Dr.€Aubleððs€testimony€did€not€surpass€theÏthreshold€for€the€admission€of€òòexpertóó›€evidence€to€negate€a€criminal€òòmensóóòòœrea›óóÐ P7 26 Ðelement.€œòòSeeóó€òòState€v.€Leroy€Hall,€Jr.óó,€No.€03C01„9303„CR„00065,€slip€op.€at€17Ð 09€48 Ð(Tenn.€Crim.€App.,€Knoxville,€Dec.€30,€1996)€(òòexpertóó€evidence€that€personalityÐ ° Ðmakeup€would€cause€the€defendant€to€act€in€a€certain€way€ð ðmisleads€the€juryÏregarding€the€defendantððs€mental€state€because€it€.€.€.€€bears€no€relevance€toÏwhether€the€defendant€was€capable€of€forming€the€requisite€mental€stateðð)ñUñ;ñUññVñ,ñVñ€òòaffððdóó,Ð P   Ð958€S.W.€2d€679€(Tenn.€1997);€òòState€v.€Sheltonóó,€854€S.W.2d€116,€122€(Tenn.€Crim.Ð 0 € ÐApp.€1992).€€For›€this€reason€œthe›€œrecord€does€not›€œestablish€that€counsel€was›Ïineffective€œfor›€œfailing›€to€œmount›€an€attack€œof€this€nature›€on€œthe€required›€mentalÏelement€of€first€degree€œmurder.ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àBecause€the€record€in€this€post„conviction€case€does€not€establish€thatÏtrial€counsel€was€ineffective€in€failing€to€assert€a€broad€attack€upon€the€defendantððsÏcapacity€to€intend€murder,€we€discern€no€basis€in€the€record€for€concluding€that€theÏtrial€court€should€have€generally€instructed€the€jury€about€such€capacity.€€At€trial,€theÏdefendant€raised€the€narrow€ð ðcapacityðð€issue€of€voluntary€intoxication,€and€the€trialÏcourt€fully€and€adequately€instructed€the€jury€on€this€issue.€€Moreover,€the€trial€courtÏproperly€instructed€the€jury€as€to€the€stateððs€burden€of€proving€the€elements€of€theÏoffense€beyond€a€reasonable€doubt.€€The€record€evinces€no€basis€for€furtherÏinstructing€the€jury€about€the€defendantððs€lack€of€capacity€to€intend€first€degreeÏmurder.€€On€this€issue,€ineffective€assistance€of€counsel€has€not€been€shown.ÌÌÓ  Óò òII.ó ó›Ð 0*€%( ÐÓ  Óà ` àà ¸ àIn€the€petitionerððs€œsecond›€issue,€he€asserts€ineffective€assistanceÏbecause€trial€counsel€failed€to€make€an€opening€statement.€€Trial€counsel€testifiedÏthat€he€did€not€wish€to€raise€issues€via€an€opening€statement€which€he€might€not€beÏable€to€prove,€especially€in€view€of€the€uncertain€status€of€the€petitionerððs€wife€as€aÏwitness,€and€he€did€not€wish€to€tip€his€defensive€hand€to€the€state.€€The€trial€courtÏdeferred€to€this€decision€as€trial€strategy€after€hearing€trial€counselððs€testimony.€€TheÏevidence€does€not€preponderate€against€this€finding.€€Trial€counsel€will€not€beÏsecond„guessed€in€matters€of€œstrategy€when€it€appears€counsel€made€an€informedÐ 09€48 Ðchoice€based€upoñLññKño€ñKññLññMñn€adequate€preparñMññNññMñtñMññNññOñationñOñ.€€òòHenleyóó,€960€S.W.2d€at€579;€òòHellard€v.Ð ° ÐStateóó,€629€S.W.2d€4,€9€(Tenn.€1982).›Ð à МÌÓ  Óò òIII.ó ó›Ð P   ÐÓ  Óà ` àà ¸ àThe€judgment€of€the€trial€court€is€affirmed.ÌÌÓÓà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  à______________________________Ìà ` àà ¸ àà  àà h àà À àà  àJAMES€CURWOOD€WITT,€JR.,€JudgeÌÌà ` àà ¸ à€ÌÌà ` àà ¸ àÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌDAVID€G.€HAYES,€JudgeÌÌÌÌ______________________________ÌJOHN€EVERETT€WILLIAMS,€Judge